labor fating looms 



FIRST EDlTIOrS 
1904 



PRESENTED BY 

THE DRAPER. Company 

HOPEDALE.IiASS. 




Class _X^_L4ll 



Book. 



lU 



Copyriglit]^^_ 



\Ci i,r 



COPYRIGHT DEPOSIT. 




THE FIRST NORTHROP LOOM. 

Designed for the weaving of Print Cloth and Sheetings 
solely. Used with great success on plain two-harness weaves bv 
our original customers. 

It was this model that first proved a weaver's capacity to 
run sixteen looms. 

It incorporated the inventions of : — 

James H. Northrop, 
Charles F. Roper, 
William F. Draper, 
George Otis Draper, 
Edward S. Stimpson and 
John W. Keeley. 

The loom frame and other conventional parts were 
designed for the Hopedale Machine CoxMpany under super- 
vision of Oren B. Smith. The H. M. Co. was incorporated 
with the present Draper Company in 1S96. 



LABOR-SAVING LOOMS> 

(FIRST EDITION.) 

A BRIEF TREATISE ON 

I^LAIN (0BAYING 

AND THE 

PECEK'r l/WPROVEMEMTS IN 
THAT LINE WITH SPECIAL 
REEERENCE TO THE . . . 

flORTHHOP liOO]V[S 

MANUFACTURED BY 

DRAPER COMPANY, 

HOPKDALK, MASS., 

U. S. A.. 

X 9 4 



LIBRftRY of CONGRESS 
Two CoDles Received 
JUL 16 1904 

\ CoDyrleht Entry 

feLAS^ (L XXo. Na 
COPY B 



V. 



V 



0,0 "V 



COPYRIGHT 1904, 

BY DRAPER COMPANY. 



WRITTEN AND COMPILED BY 

GEORGE OTIS DRAPER, 

SECRETARY OF THE DRAPER COMPANY. 



u 



PRINTED BY 

Cook & Sons, Milford, Mass. 



PRBFACM. 

This book cannot serve as a detailed catalogue by which the 
purchaser can always note the exact nature of the devices we 
shall continue to sell, as improvements are' often unexpectedly 
invented. We can hardly expect to publish a work of this size 
at short intervals, but shall try to keep it reasonably up to date 
by amended additions. New matter will be inserted in the final 
pages of each edition after the first. 




OUR HOPEDALE PLANT IN 1904. 

Scale, 315 feet to the inch. 

About 37 acres of floor space in all. 



FORMJER LITMRATURB ON THE 
NORTHROP LOOM. 

1895. 

Circular — T/ie Advent of the Northrop Loom, issued April, 

1895. 

Essay, The Present Development of the Northrop Loom, 
delivered by George Otis Draper at the meeting of the N. E. 
Cotton Manufacturers' Association at Atlanta, Ga., Oct. 24, 
1S95. Printed in Vol. 59 of the Transactions. 

1896. 

Papers on The Northrop Loom, by F. M. Messenger, John 
H. Hines, H. D. Wheat, and discussion by Wm. F. Draper, 
Arthur H. Lowe, George F. Whittam and W. J. Kent, April 
39, 1896, printed in Vol. 60 of the Transactions of the N. E. 
Cotton Manufacturers' Association. 

Chapter in Facts and Figures, on the Northrop Loom, 
published by George Draper & Sons in the spring of 1896. 

Speech of Hon. Wm. C. Lovering, published in the Scien- 
tific American of May 2, 1896, and other papers, containing 
pertinent refei'ence to the loom. 

Pamphlet— 27z^ L.ooms of the South, by F. B. de Berard, 
issued March, 1896, containing detail of savings from use of the 
Northrop Loom in Southern mills. 

Speech of Hon. Charles Warren Lippitt, published in the 
Manufacturers' Record of June 19, and papers generally through- 
out the country, giving the history of the Northrop loom devel- 
opment as illustrative of the educational influence of manufac- 
turing. 



IS97. 

Pamphlet — Instructions for Running Northrop Looms^ issued 
by George Draper & Sons, January, 1S97. 

Pamphlet — Instructions Pour la Conduite de Metiers North- 
rop^ issued by the Draper Company, 1897. 

Circular — Our Common loom^ issued by the Draper Com- 
pany, June, 1897. 

Circular — The Triumph of the Northrop loom, November, 
T897. 

1898. 

Circular — Our Connection with the Art of Weaving, issued 
by the Draper Company, April, 189S. 

Circular — Take-up Mechanism, issued by the Draper Com- 
pany, 1898. 

Article — Industrial Investigations, by Jacob Schoenhof, in 
The Forum for October, 1898. Referred to the great savings 
of the "Automatic loom," as affecting differences in cost of 
production. 

1899. 

Pamphlet — Instructions for Running Northrop Looms, (Re- 
vised Edition,) issued by the Draper Company, January, 1899. 

Pamphlet — Machinery and Labor Displacement, by George 
Gunton, issued by the Gunton Institute, containing pertinent 
reference to the Northrop Loom as a labor-saving invention. 



1900. 

Circular — The Advance of the Northrop Loom, January, 1900. 
Pamphlet — Factory Conditions in the South, Januar}^ 30, 
1900, by George Gunton, in Gunton's Lecture Bureau course. 



Paper on Method of Cost Finding by Wm. G. Nichols, 
delivei-ed at a meeting of the N. E. Cotton Manufacturers' Asso- 
ciation at Boston, April 26, 1900. Printed in Vol. 68 of the 
Transactions. 

Essay on Improt^ements in American Cotton Machinery^ by 
George Otis Draper, delivered at a meeting of the Southern 
Cotton Spinners' Association at Charlotte, N. C, May 18, 1900. 
Printed in the Association records and various periodicals. 



1 901. 

Chapter in Textile Texts^ published by the Draper Com- 
pany, spring of 1901. 

Various articles in publication, Cotton Chats^ started in 
July, 1 901, and continued since. 

Circular on Important Discovery^ relating to method of 
spinning to prevent bunches in cloth, August, 1901. 



1903. 
Circular on The Keene Drawing-in Machine^ January, 1903. 

1903. 

Circular on The Northrop Loom, issued by the British 
Northrop Loom Co., January, 1903. 

Essay on Continued Developtnent of the Northrop Looni, deliv- 
ered by General Draper at a meetixig of the N. E. Cotton Manu- 
facturers' Association in Boston, April 23, 1903, printed in Vol. 
74 of the Transactions. 

Various references in a book, The American Cotton Industry, 
by T. M. Young, published b}^ Charles Scribners' Sons, 1903. 

Chapter on Northrop Loom in Textile Texts, second edi- 
tion, issued December, 1903. 



Essay on 77?,? Development of the Northrop Looni^ delivered 
before the Providence Society of Mechanical Engineers by 
George Otis Draper, printed in Providence Jom-nal, Dec. 28, 
1903 and other trade journals. 

1904. 

Circular on List of Northrop Looms Sold, issued January, 
1904. 

Article on Evolution of the Cotton Industry, published in 
Gunton's Magazine for February, 1904. 

Pamphlet, Labor Saving Looms, (the present volume). 

The present circular contains practically all the information 
that is applicable to date, so that our former issues would have 
no present interest. 

(This list for 1904 is only complete to April ist.) 



COLLJ^CTBD EVIDENCE. 

Also Northrop Loom History, Vol. I, 1S89-1S93 — 574 
pages. 

Northrop Loom History, Vol. IL, 1S93-1S96 — -1097 
pa«^cs. 

Northrop Loom History, Vol. HI, 1897- 1900 — 818 
pages. 

These books are by the Secretary of the Draper Company 
and were compiled for general reference and use by counsel 
during litigation. They contain the history of the exper- 
iments and development of the loom, and associated matters 
of interest. Their contents are naturally private, and not in- 
tended for general circulation, although the public is therefore 
deprived of an acquaintance with a unique mechanical romance. 
It is believed that no other volumes of like size were ever pre- 
pared for such a purpose. 



In our circular of November, 1897, we had a word to say 
to possible competitors which still seems pertinent. We there- 
fore reprint a portion as a few unfortunate experimenters failed 
to note its truth on first appearance : 

"There are doubtless mauy bright meu who will iu tlie next few 
years give time aud toil in the endeavor to evade the claims of our pat- 
ents while producing- similar mechanism. In view of the many other 
tields for inveutive skill we ask— Is it worth the while V We are un- 
doubtedly the first in the field and legitimately entitled to a fair reward 
for the expenditure of money, loss of time and consumption of brain 
energy. Our success is no vagary of chance or luckv stroke of for- 
tune. Every step in advance has been gained after constant thought 
and experiment, with ten failures for evei-y success. The patent office 
lias recognized the novelty of our devices by bi-oad basic claims. We 
have searched the records here and abroad, and have proof that we are 
pioneers in our line. AVe shall defend our rigiits in the courts with the 
obstinacy of conviction, if such methods are necessary. We have no 
wish for chance to show our strength. A lawsuit involves a waste of 
energy for one side at least, aud an expense for both. We appreciate 
these facts after thirty years of continuous litigation." 



13 



THE ART OF WEAVING. 




The process of weaving cloth consists in interlacing a con- 
tinuous thread amidst a series of parallel threads. Without 
giving an exhaustive history of the art it may be pertinent ibr 
further comparison to note down certain steps in its progress. 
It is fairly well established to-day that woven goods were used 
as clothing by the ancient Egyptians fully 6000 years ago. I 
have seen in Switzerland a preserved section of a net woven of 

twisted threads supposed to have 
been the work of the Lake dwellers 
in pre-historic times. In the ear- 
lier processes it is probable that 
the warp threads were stretched on 
pegs, the weft being inserted by 
the fingers. In such weaving the 
warp threads usually lie vertically 
and in fact this is the method used 




13 



to-day in producing rugs in the Orient with short wefts. With 
the use of longer weft also came the use of a stick with a 
hooked end for pulling it into position. If we are to form our 
further comparisons on a plain print cloth of the present width of 
28 inches containing 64 threads of warp and 64 of filling per inch, 
it is possible that the rate of weaving by this method on such 
goods could be figured as low as one pick per minute per opera- 
tive in the earliest use. Cloth is still woven by this method in 
India, although a harness motion 
is added. History gives us no rec- 
ord of the time at which the 
warp threads were divided by har- 
nesses and the shuttle introduced. 
References are made to shuttles in the 
Bible and other ancient books. It is 
probable that the general styles of 
hand loom weaving were very simi- 
lar for many centuries without defi- 
nite change until the invention of 
the fly shuttle by John Kay in i733- 
At this time, in weaving broad cloth, 

it was necessary to 
have two weavers at 
least, one at each end 
of the lay to thro^v the 
shuttle to the other. 
By Kay's invention one 
of these two men was 
dispensed "with and 
even on narrow weav- 
ing a weaver could 
produce at least twice 
as much cloth per day. 





H 



No literature that I have run across gives anv figures of produc- 
tion on the looms of this period and considering their crudeness 
in other lines, it is^ perhaps lair to assume that they could not pro- 
duce at a greater speed than 20 picks per minute before Kay's 
time, probably averaging less. Ka3-'s invention caused great com- 
motion amongst the weaving trade and he was forced bv 
persecution to leave the countrv. Cartwright's power loom 
patent was granted in 17S5. Authorities differ as to the 
success of his first looms, some claiming that the earlv 
use was of no importance, while others refer to a mill of 
500 looms in which Cartwright was interested, as being 
destroved in 1790 bv a mob in svmpathy with the hand loom 
weavers. Whatever the cause, there were as late as 1S13 but 
2400 power looms in all Great Britain. The first power loom 
was introduced in Waltham in America in iSi^^. At this period 
one operative was required to each loom, as they had no weft 
stop motion and no self acting temples, the weaver having to 
intermittently move the flat wooden pieces with points at the 
end which held the cloth extended at the selvage. The inven- 
tion of the rotarv temple by Ira Draper in 1S16, as developed 
several years later, allowed the operative to tend two looms 
instead of one. The speed of the common power loom at this 
time does not seem to be recorded, but it was probably between 
So and roo picks per minute. In 1820 it is figured that there 
were about 15,000 power looms in England and Scotland and in 
1S30 perhaps 60,000. Even as late as 1840 there were said 
to be 250,000 hand looms still running. At this time ^veavers 
in England were not given more than one loom each, although 
in America they were running two looms, as the English 
manufacturers did not adopt the rotary temple so early 
as our American manufacturers. As to the comparative 
production of the common looms at this period, it is difiicult to 
find any accurate basis of comparison. Hand looms were weav- 



15 



ing print cloth as late as 1S96 in Bohemia, where the production 
figured on 64 picks per inch in the cloth at ten hours per day 
would give an average of 35 picks per minute. I have been 
given figures of hand loom production recently that would sug- 
gest a possible speed of 60 picks per minute. About 1S40 the 
weft fork began to be introduced and in America, by 1S50, print 
looms were running at a speed of 150 picks per minute, with 
one operative tending four looms. Perhaps they even ran faster 
in England, but the operatives only tended two looms. From 
this period to 1S95 the plain loom was not materially changed in 
principle, and yet the perfection of detail had brought the speed 
of the American plain loom up to 190 picks with one good 
weaver tending eight looms, while the English operative with 
looms at a speed of 320 picks per minute was tending four 
looms, though usually with a helper. In 1S95 the Northrop 
looms then introduced immediately allowed one weaver to run 
16 print looms at 190 picks and to-day it is assumed that a good 
weaver with the Northrop loom on prints can easily tend 24. 
In calling the speed of the American print loom 190 picks it is 
not intended to give a maximum. American print looms have 
run over 200 picks, but such is not the genei-al practice. In the 
same way English looms have run higher than 320 picks, but 
the figures given are assumed as fair for the purposes of com- 
parison and as illustrating the general practice. 

Arranging a table of comparison, if we take 24 Northrop 
looms at 190 picks per minute, we have a total of 4560 picks. 
On the same basis, without allowance for stops, eight common 
looms would show 1520 picks, or four English common looms 
at 220 picks, S80 picks per weaver. The perfected hand loom 
would show perhaps 30 to 60. The power loom of 1850, at 150 
picks, with four to the operative, would show 600 picks per 
minute, while the loom of about 1S40, before the weft fork, 
would show with two looms per weaver at perhaps 130 picks 



i6 



per minute, 360 picks. Before the temple, the loom at 100 
picks with one loom per weaver, would give 100 picks, while 
the hand loom before Kay at 30 picks, the loom of the middle 
ages with a possible 10 picks, and the loom of ancient history 
with a possible one pick per minute, brings our table down to a 
concrete illustration, w^hich, even if faulty in detail, allows a 
comprehensive idea of the wonderful advantages since the earli- 
est application of the art. The Northrop loom in eight years 
has added over 3000 picks per minute per operative; the devel- 
opment since 1850, 930 picks ; the inventions from 1830 to 1850, 
370 picks ; the inventions from 1830 to 1830, 130 picks; the 
inventions from Kay to 1830 would add 80 picks, the progress 
previous to this time being represented by 30 picks. It will 
thus be seen that within two centuries the productive power of 
the operative has been increased 338 times, and it is also seen 

that the advantages of the Northrop loom show 
twice as much in product as all of the other 
inventions put together. 

History is practically silent as to the inventors who supplied 
the earlier devices employed on the hand loom. It is not, there- 
fore, known who suggested the idea of the harness motion with 
its shifting heddles, the swinging lay with its reed, the take-up 
roll, the early jaw temple, and the shuttle itself. Starting -with. 
Kay, the development before the Northrop loom is sho^wn by 
the following table, material for which is collected from stand- 
ard works on weaving. No attempt is made to include the vari- 
ous inventors of fancy loom devices, including the jacquard 
motion, the dobby motion, and other ingenious developments. 
It might be vs^ell, however, to note that the earliest mechanism 
for fancy weaving ; namely, the di'op box, was invented by 
Robert Kay, son of John, in 1760. In preparing the table it 
has also been thought well to limit the inventions to show only 
the anticipation of the general principles employed. It is 



17 



impossible to properly note any but the pioneer inventors, and 
the dates given are usually those of their patents. Very possi- 
bly more credit is due other inventors not mentioned, for their 
perfection of ideas that otherwise would not have been useful. 

1733. Fly shuttle, John Kay. 

1786. Pov^er loom, Edmitnd Cartwright. 

(First suggestion of warp-stop-motion, weft-stop-motion, 
positive let-off and take-up.) 

1796. Over-pick, binder, protector, and frog, Richard 
Gorton. 

1796. Ratchet take-up, Robert Miller. 

1803. Shedding motion, John Todd. 

181 6. Revolving temple, Ira Draper. 

1831. Multiple harness motion, Robert Bowman. 

1828. Complete power loom with modern over-pick, 
"William Dickinson. 

1830. Complete power loom, Richard Roberts. 

(These two instances of complete power looms are men- 
tioned as showing a general development of ideas not noted in 
detail, which together produced practical ^veaving machines.) 

1831. Weft fork, claimed by Clinton G. Gilroy. 

1834. First shuttle-changer, John Patterson Reid and 
Thomas Johnson. 

1834. Weft fork, claimed by Ramsbottom and Holt. 
1838. Picker check, Robert Pickles. 

1840. Improved temple, George Draper. 

1 841. Weft fork improvements, William Kenworthy and 
James Bullough. 

1842. Loose reed, James Bullough. 

1845. Loom brake, John Sellers. 

1846. Parallel shuttle-motion for under-pick loom, War- 
ren W. Dutcher. 



1 8 



[85 1. Reciprocating" temple, Elihu and Warren W. 
Dntcher. 

1857. Automatic let-off, Snell and Bartlett. 
1859. Rocker motion. W. Stearns. 
1S63. Loose frog, George Draper. 

1567. Double beam let-off, Cottrell and Draper (George). 
186S. Practical self -threading shuttle, J. A. Metcalf. 

1568. Broad loom shuttle-motion, J. Lyall. 
1869. Inside catch shuttle, J. H. Coburn. 

There is quite a lapse between 1870 and 1890 in which no 
very important patents on plain looms were granted. In fact, 
looms made before 1850 continued running for 3'ears in compe- 
tition with those built long after, the more modern looms not 
showing any notable advantage, except perhaps in heavier con- 
struction and higher possible speed. It must be remembered 
that I am still referring to the plain, common loom, not in any 
way intending to disparage the remarkable advance in the range 
of fancy loom devices in that period, including the hair-cloth 
loom, pile fabric loom, tape loom, etc., etc., etc. 

Owing to an error in the index of the official British publi- 
cation of Abridgements of the Specifications relating to Weav- 
ing, it was only recently that we discovered the first patent in 
which the idea of changing shuttles automatically is referred to. 
Such a reference occurs in that granted John Patterson Reid 
and Thomas Johnson, No. 6579, in the British Patent Office, 
dated March 20, 1834. The specification refei's to a number of 
different inventions, contemplating the weaving of four webs of 
cloth at once in a vertical loom. It shows a mechanism de- 
signed to change the shuttles vsdien any one weft thread breaks, 
or fails, the substitution occurring by an instantaneous move- 
ment, without any act of the attendant, and without stopping 
the loom, the mechanism being brought into action by a weft 
stopper annexed to the shuttle. The specification also refers to 



changing shuttle boxes to bring different colored weft into 
action. It also contains a jacquard mechanism. Both Reid and 
Johnson were prolific inventors, Johnson having taken out a 
patent as early as 1803, for a dressing machine, and Reid as 
early as 1S37, for a l"y motion. Johnson and Reid together 
took out several other patents for less interesting improvements. 

The discovery of the Reid and Johnson patent of 1S34 
displaces a former claimant ; namely, Charles Parker, who took 
out an English patent in 1S40 for a very similar combination. 
The next invention in this line is of the year iS^jz. Meanwhile, 
however, Mr. Clinton G. Gilro}' issued his noted work on weav- 
ing in 1S44, in which in a satirical and humorous vein, he refers 
to the loom of Arphaxad, explained to Deioces, the first king of 
the Medes. In the description of this loom it states : 

' '//z order to avoid stopping the motion of the loom when one or 
more of the weft threads breaks or become exhausted^ a few spare 
shuttles are to be lodged in suitable receptacles^ 7vhich a7-e so arranged 
that the mere breaking of a tveft thread will cause a change of shut- 
tle instantaneously (by the substitution of a spare one in its stead)'' 

The detail of the operation is described at some length ; 
also the mechanism by which the loom will stop, supposing the 
total number of shuttles to be exhausted. He also describes a 
shuttle-changer for application to different colors of weft yarn 
to produce patterns in the cloth. The operation of the change 
of filling is similar to that in the Reid & Johnson and Parker 
patents, the details seeming to show that the author was well 
acquainted with the Reid & Johnson patent, and possibl}- the 
Parker patent also. Gilro3''s reference is mereh' an indirect 
satire on our patent system, though many of his readers have 
since taken this part of his work seriously. Gilroy himself was 
an inventor of considerable prominence in the weaving line, 
and must have considered the idea of changing filling too chi- 
merical to be practicallv developed. 




Fig. 20 — Roberts Loom. Side Elevation. 



In our earliest public reference to the Northrop loom, name- 
ly, that quoted in the paper of our Mr. George Otis Draper, 
read before the New England Cotton Manufacturers' Associa- 
tion, at their meeting in Atlanta, October, 1895, it "was stated 
that looms rested while improvements changed the form of 
other cotton machinery, '•'•plain weaving 7-e7naining in its element- 
ary stage.'''' Also, '•'•No radical change in any vital feature can be 
shown as the result of the last fifty years." These remarks 



awakened some comment and criticism, calling forth a 
reference in our circular, The Advance of the Northrop Loovi^ 
to the loom manufactured by Richard Roberts in 1S30. We 
now show a print of this loom, which was sixty-five years old 
at the time of the Atlanta meeting, and call attention to the fact 
that its general design and equipment is very similar to that of 
common looms at the time of the introduction of the Northrop 
' improvements. Practically all of the important elements of 
plain weaving are shown in precisely the same relative positions 
which they now occupy ; in fact, the weft foi'k is the only 
notable omission. 



Other authorities have since added testimony of similar 
sort : — 

"It may safely be asserted that at the present time no subject is 
receiving more careful consideration than that of weaving. In its 
essentials the power loom has changed little since the date of its inven- 
tion. It has been made heavier, the details of the let-off and the take- 
up and the numerous other parts have been changed in their degree of 
efficiency, but little in their method of operation. Yet from the begin- 
ning of the century it has been clearly foreseen that a most radical 
change in weaving would take place upon the invention of a simple and 
efficient weft supplying mechanism. "^ — \^Hennj I. Harriman at the Boston 
meeting of the N. E. Cot. 3Imi. Asso., April 26, 1900. 



The incompleteness of the earlier automatic looms is also 
verified : — 

"In the case of weft supplying looms the difficulty of transferring 
such a large body as a slmttle, in the very short period of time given 
between picks, prevented their general use. The process was destruc- 
tive both to the loom and the shuttle, and it is safe to say that none of 
these numei'ous inventions was ever put to practical use."" — [il. /. Har- 
riman at Boston meeting of the N. E. Got. Man. Asso.., Ajjril 26, 1900. 

"But following 1870 there was a very general absence of work on 
automatic looms until there appeared that remarkable series of inven- 
tions perfected by the Draper Company.'" — [H I. Harriman at Boston 
meeting of the A'. E. Cot. Man. Asso., April 26, 1900. 



HISTORY OF THE NORTHROP LOOM. 

In order to avoid the usually inevitable misstatements made 
years afterward concerning the early conception and introduc- 
tion of important inventions, we v\dll briefly record the perti- 
nent facts concerning the early history of the Northrop loom. 

The predecessors of our pi'esent Company started as far 
back as iSi6, to perfect the power loom, Ira Draper inventing 
the revolving temple at this period. At the formation of the 
partnership of George Draper & Son in i86S, the business con- 
trolled by this firm and other Hopedale companies chiefly rela- 
ted to loom improvements, including let-off motions, parallel 
motions, thin-place preventers, loose frogs, etc. The ring and 
spindle inventions, however, coming in soon after, assumed 
such prominence that the loom department became a secondary 
feature. The members of the firm, however, often speculated 
on the possible advantages of automatic weaving, considering 
this as a possible field for future development. 

On July 26, 18S8, Mr. William F. Draper, Jr., heard of a 
loom invention in Providence, and saw the inventors and their 
device, which was an automatic shuttle-changer. He reported 
at home that the general idea was interesting, but the device not 
practical, in his opinion. Our firm then had an exhaustive in- 
vestigation of the patent situation made through competent 
counsel. The report seemed to show that there was little 
novelty in this special application of the idea, but the firm 
had become sufliciently interested to risk a further trial of 
the general principle, and on December loth voted a sum of 
$10,000 for experiments, and started an inventor, Mr. Alonzo 
E. Rhoades, on the task of devising a practical shuttle-changing 
loom. That Mr. Rhoades lost no time is proved by the fact 



23 



that he had an operative loom ready to be started, with warp 
and filling, by February 2Sth of 1SS9. This loom, after being 
reconstructed with new patterns during the next few months, 
though not changed in principle, ran with good success. Some 
twelve years later, for purposes of patent litigation, the same 
loom was started up and run for days under the eye of a patent 
expert, accomplishing its purpose so well as to draw forth his 
unqualified approval. 

Leaving the Rhoades loom at this stage, it is necessary to 
retrace our history to the year 1857. when Mr. James H. North- 
rop was born in Keighley, England, on May Sth of that year. 
After becoming an expert mechanic and factory foreman in his 
own country, Mr. Northrop came to this side in May, 1881, 
soon drifting to Hopedale, where he became employed as an 
expert on metal patterns. His invention of the Northrop Spool- 
er Guide brought him to the notice of his employers, and he 
was selected by them to work out the idea of an automatic knot- 
tver for spoolers. Although showing great ingenuity, the 
devices did not appear commercially practical, and the inventor 
became sufficiently discouraged to abandon the shop and devote 
his time to farming. Not finding this occupation congenial, he 
applied for employment some years later, in the fall of 18SS, 
but the only opening then present was a job as mechanic at $2 
per day. In February, Northrop, who had noted the progress 
of the Rhoades idea, spoke to Mr. George Otis Draper, who 
had just entered the firm of George Draper & Sons, stating that 
if given a chance he could put a shuttle-changer on a loom in 
one week's time, that could be made in quantities for a cost of 
$1 each. On March 5th, Mr. Draper drove to his farm and saw a 
rough wooden model of his idea, which was set up in his hen- 
house. At Mr. Draper's recommendation, the firm ordered an- 
other loom for experiments, and after its arrival Mr. Northrop 
was started on April 8th to work out his scheme. By May 20th 



34 



he had conchided that his first idea was not practical, and having 
meanwhile thought out a new plan, he asked for an extension of 
time until the fourth of July in which to perfect it. On July 5th, 
the completed loom wa.s. running at speed, and as it seemed to 
involve more advantages than the Rhoades pattern, the weaver 
was taken off of the Rhoades loom and transferred to the North- 
rop. On October 24th a loom with new construction, from 
revised patterns, was running at the Seaconnet Mill in Fall 
River, and more looms of the same kind were started up there 
at intervals. Mr. Northrop had, however, meanwhile thought 
out his idea of changing filling in the shuttle, some of the parts 
of such a mechanism taking shape as early as October. The 
development at our works continued so favorably that by April 
of 1S90 a lot of filling-changing looms were started in the same 
Seaconnet Mill, the shuttle-changing looms having been changed 
back to common looms, in view of the additional advantages of 
the filling-changing pattern. 

To show the situation at this period we quote from a letter 
sent a prominent mill official May 15, 1S90: 

"Replying to your favor of tlie 14th iust. would say that we are get- 
ting along as rapidly as we could hope or expect with our new shuttle 
patent, considering the fact that we are doing what seemed to be a very 
difficult thing and reacliing out into a field where we have nothing to 
guide us. 

We are now running 12 looms in a mill constantly. They are pro- 
ducing from 5 per cent, to 10 per cent, more per loom than other looms 
in the same mill and are all making first-class cloth. We have not yet 
fully tested them to see how great a reduction we can make in the num- 
ber of weavers. This we are proposing to do at the earliest moment. 

We do not feel at liberty to change one or more looms for you at the 
present time and in explanation will map out to you our proposed course 
and we think you will agree with us that our policy is a wise one. 

What we intend to do is to perfect by practically running as long as 
seems necessary these 12 looms before making or trying any more. 
When we have perfected these 12 looms we propose to put in 100 or 200 
looms and when these 100 or 200 looms are running to our entire satis- 
faction we shall hope to apply the invention to the entire mill. When 
the entire mill is running to our satisfaction we shall then be very 
anxious to try our inventions at other places. 

Our reasons for adopting this course are, first, we want to devote 
all our time and energy and inventive capacity to perfect the design in 



25 



one place so as to be sui-e we shall make a success of it there. We be- 
lieve that in this way we shall be able to i)ut the invention on 3000 or 
4000 looms or 10,000 looms much more (luickly and satisfactorily than 
in any other way." 

Attempts have been made b\' interested parties to show that 
these earlier trials were experimental in character, and produc- 
tive of nothing practical at the time. Such, however, was not 
the case. These earlier trials, both of shuttle-changer and fill- 
ing-changer, showed practically operative mechanisms, which 
were run on many looms weaving cloth for the regular mill 
product, with the regular mill help; in fact, when we trans- 
ferred our trial of mechanisms from Fall River t(; another mill 
centre, the looms which we left were run for months In the mill 
help without superintendence on our part, and v\ithout e\en a 
casual inspection by any of our men. 

We left the twelve looms running under the normal super- 
vision of the mill management in March, 1891. To show how 
well these early mechanisms did their work we quote from the 
following letter received from the overseer of the room June 37, 
1891 :— 

"I am proud to inform ycnu that tliere has not been a uiishap of any 
kind this week. The looms are weavin.2" faster than the spinning frame 

can spin. Mr. seems suri)i-ised to see the weavers standin<>^ at the 

end of the frame waiting- for the doffers and their looms stopi)ed. 
Notwithstanding having to wait so many times for filling, the produc- 
tion for the week ending 27th is seventy-eiglit (78) cuts." 

We found it would be necessary to build complete new 
looms in order to derive the best residts from the new mechan- 
isms. This required an entire equipment of the necessary tools 
and a considerable enlargement in plant, as we had never been 
loom builders. We also found that it was advisable to de\elop 
a practical warp-stop-motion for use with the filling-changer, 
and this of itself dehned the introduction of the loom for sev- 
eral years. We ran into annoNing mechanical difficulties, it 
requiring a long time to sohe tlic ap]Kircntly sim])le ]:>roblcm 



26 



of tempering the shuttle springs so that they would not break. 
Even with the loom complete in every detail, we were not ready 
to take large orders until we had equipped a weave room of ovu" 
own and run it continuously for many months. 

To go into further detail and cover the entire ground would 
require more space than can now be afforded. The further con- 
tents of this book may aid in giving a proper conception of the 
further development ; and yet the finished products shown con- 
vey no intimation of the countless experiments and trials of 
devices which have not entered into the accepted combination. 
Many of these are shown in our voluminous patents ; others are 
still unhonored. They all form a part of the unwritten story, 
however, and often might furnish interesting chapters. 

Our manner of developing improvements is outlined in the 
paper of Gen. Draper delivered before tbe New England Cotton 
Manufacturers' Association on April 22, 1903. 

"Our routine has been, firstly, to run a number of looms experi- 
mentally in a room in our shop, and by means of special observers, in 
addition to the weavers, to note results in detail. These results are 
collated in daily reports, which are preserved for study and reference. 
Notes are made of everything- outside of perfect weaving, the breakage, 
wear or slipping of parts, the failure of mechanism to act every time as 
intended, impei-fections in the cloth, like thick or thin places, the num- 
ber of warp and filling threads broken and why they break, if it can be 
knoAvu. After studying these reports in connection with personal ob- 
servation of the running looms, changes are made, with a view to im- 
provement if possible. Pieces that bi-eak are strengthened, or strains 
are removed; parts that slip are more securely fastened ; and wear is 
obviated where it seems possible. 

New devices are suggested to obviate cloth imperfections, or break- 
age of warp or filling, of bobbins or shuttles. The new parts are made 
and tested in comparison with the old ones, and nine times out of ten 
they don't work as well. Perhaps they don't overcome the difficulty; 
perhaps in overcoming it they introduce new ones. After one failure 
comes anotlier attempt, and as a rule another failure, but something is 
learned from each trial and the general course is towards improvement. 

The Avorst troubles to find and cure are those that are intermittent 
and infrequent. A device will work as intended a hundred or a thou- 
sand times. Then it fails once from some unknown cause; then it goes 
on all rigiit as before. One seldom or never sees the failure except in 
result, and if it happens before one's very eyes the motions of the loom 
are too rapid to make eyesight of much advantage. One can only rea- 
son in these cases and, "as in some other mattei'S, unassisted reason with- 



27 



out sufficient data comes pretty near being a guess. However, guess we 
must or let the defect continue, and in some cases we have guessed 
right. In others we are still guessing. 

After we reach what seems a real improvement on one loom, we 
try it on a dozen, more or less, and keep records for a month or two. 
Here again disappointment often comes in and we return to fresh study 
and experiment. H, however, the advance proves real, we next 
arrange a mill test ; that is, we fill an order, or a part of an order, for 
looms with the new device, and submit it to the tender mercies of those 
who have to run it practically and without any special interest beyond 
"day-pay and Saturday night." 

This kills many an infant invention that would be of value if prop- 
erly cared for. No new device in minor detail can succeed in the mill if 
it causes extj-a trouble, even if it does better work ; and if any new 
adjustments are introduced, they are almost sure to introduce wrong set- 
ting. Lack of adjustment induces filing and chipping to attain positions 
that our experiments have shown to be wrong, but the fixers have not 
been through the experimenting and sometimes want to make improve- 
ments themselves. Cams that have been cai-efully worked out have 
been filed or ground so that they would not work as intended and the 
device has been condemned, and in more than one instance operating 
parts have been cut off" with a cold chisel and the new device pronounced 
valueless. 

After this experience we re-design, simplify and try to make the 
new arrangement easier to run than the old, and if we succeed and 
accomplish the original design, we have made a step forward. 

It is fair to say that from these mill tests we often get ideas of 
great practical value from intelligent operators, who see necessities that 
had not occurred to us, more than enough, perhaps, to offset the stupid 
condemnation of others who do not appreciate fine points and never 
will until they have become a part of their regular drill, and only then 
because if they can't make a machine run, there are plenty of others 
who know how to do it." 

Perhaps nothing in the line of history is more significant 
than our various statements published in the wav of advertise- 
ments in trade papers. The whole of anticipation, progress 
and realization i« thus set down as it was, or assumed to be, at 
the time. Those that follow are actual quotations from publica- 
tions of the years mentioned. 



28 



1895. 

"We believe that certain improvements w^e ai"e soon to in- 
troduce will divide the cost of w^eaving by tw^o on all plain 
goods. 

We have a complete weave room of eighty looms running 
on print cloth, which is open to the inspection of interested 
manufacturers." 

"It is a gi-ave question whether we should invite more 
(loom) orders under the circumstances. A success may prove 
embarrassing when it comes so suddenly." 

"Textile workers should be interested in all inventions that 
make their labor easier, cleaner or healthier. 

What is more unclean or unhealthy than the now necessary 
process of sucking filling through a shuttle eye ? 

We are introducing a loom which automatically threads the 
shuttle without labor on the part of the weaver. This loom 
also prevents damage to the cloth, caused by broken warp 
threads." 

"Many persons are disappointed in the Northrop Loom 
because it does not produce finished goods at one end from a 
bale of cotton fed into a hopper at the other side." 

"We believe a purchase of common looms a grave error at 
the present day." 



1896. 

"A mill that orders common looms at the present time de- 
liberately handicaps its future prospects." 

"We now recommend this (Northrop) loom and stake our 
reputation on its success." 

"The majority believe in progress. They favor inventions 



29 



that relieve human labor by transferring operations from fingers 
to levers and cams. The Northrop Loom is of this class." 

"We do not have to reply on assertion. Thousands of 
(Northrop) looms are in actual use testifying to their own 
merit." 

"We have had additional orders already from six of the first 
ten mills supplied." 

"Consign your common looms to the scrap heap where 
they belong, and equip with machines that will earn a profit." 



1897. 

"The Northrop Loom is now an Unquestioned Success on 
all plain cotton fabrics. . . . We have never had a more 
positive conviction. This Loom must be adopted." 

"When mills like the Pacific and Tremont & Suffolk throw 
out common looms for New Northrop Looms, the question of 
success is solved. 

Before the vear is over the Amoskeag Mfg. Co. will have 
nearly 10,000 looms changed to take our motions." 

"Weavers on all common looms choke their lungs with cot- 
ton fibre. When the filHng is colored the effect is more or less 
poisonous, and in either case the health is undermined." 

"It is commercial suicide to buy a common loom in the face 
of facts easily known and proved." 

"Why not return to hand looms and get a cheap equipment, 
also giving more laborers employment?" 



1898. 
"What would you think of a loom that requires but half 



30 



the labor, weaves more perfect cloth and will run over time 
without need for attention? 

Would you buy it at a price that makes it the cheapest ma- 
chine ever put in your mill, or would you wait, and doubt, and 
doubt and wait, until the competition of the enterprising foi'ced 
you into line at the rear of the procession?" 

"Adverse criticism has often killed a good idea in its 
infancy while its strength was not equal to the struggle. We 
escaped the fate which many prophesied." 

"The only hope for our cotton mills in these critical times 
lies in the prompt adoption of improved machinery. 
It may be urged that if all mills put in new machinery they will 
simply be back at the old competitive level — very true — but thev 
will not all do it. Therein lies the chance for profit for those 
who have the necessary covu-age, capital, or happy combination 
of both." 

"The doubters and the skeptics are not yet silenced — they 
never will be. Some of them still think it a great mistake for 
mills to use high speed spindles, filling frames and revolving flat 
cards. We have no time to waste on their conviction, as their 
species must yield to the natural law — the survival of the fittest." 



1899. 

"The mills that refuse their opportunities v\all find their 
future utility serving as picturesque ruins in the landscape." 

"If old mills stand in timid dread on the brink of indeci- 
sion the new mills will crowd them over the edge." 

"You can feel assured that merit is recognized when the 
copyist appears — but you don't want a copy." 

"Let us then renew the assurances of our distinguished con- 



31 



sideration, while we devote our energies to filling the orders 
with which we havx been favored." 



1900. 

"The greater part of the cloth woven in this country is 
made on plain looms. We have devoted about 10 years to the 
perfection of the plain loom and have now made it automatic 
and self-protecting against errors." 

"We intend to keep up with the demand for our machinery 
if ^Are have to roof in the whole town." 

"A new common loom in a Southern cotton mill is now a 
curiosity." 

"We are battling with nature, filling ponds, diverting river 
channels, raising valleys, etc., to make room on which to con- 
tinue extensions." 

"We still solicit orders in the confidence that bricks and 
lumber may be obtained in sufiicient quantity to house out in- 
crease of plant." 

"Why ship cotton to Europe when mills at home can man- 
ufacture it more profitably now that improved machinery gives 
them another advantage?" 

"The great development of the Southern cotton mill system 
started with the Northrop loom and the continued association of 
the two forms an interesting object lesson." 

"We melt 100 tons of iron per day to make the castings for 
our Northrop looms, etc. But that is not enough. Enlarge- 
ments still in progress." 

"We have now sold over 60,000 Northrop looms. We are 
shipping 1500 a month and enlarging our works to increase that 
output. We are emploving 2500 men and shall greatly increase 



32 



this force when new shops are ready. And what does this all 
mean? Simply that the success of the Northrop loom is astound- 
ing, even those who have held their faith." 

"The steady progress of the Northrop loom is a certain evi- 
dence of its merit. Adverse criticism has often killed a good 
idea in its infancy while its strength was not equal to the strug- 
gle. We escaped the fate that many prophesied. Our loom has 
passed the trial stage." 

"Let all who favor progress unite in placing American cot- 
ton mills where they can compete with foreign countries without 
reducing their labor scale to the standard set in England, Ger- 
many, Russia, India, China, Japan and other outside manufac- 
tviring sections." 

"We build the famous Northrop Loom. It is also manu- 
factured by our licensees in Canada, Germany, France and 
Switzerland. Four of these looms are running at the Paris 
Exposition, attracting wide attention." 

"The successful development of our loom gives a mill a 
chance of making a great saving in its expenses w^ithout increas- 
ing the labor or responsibility of the management, and by reduc- 
tion of the number of employes it actually lessens the invest- 
ment necessary for tenements and the labor used in paying off 
and supei-v'ising. The possible profit from a Northrop loom 
mill will pay good dividends v\^hen a competing mill with com- 
mon looms is not able to show more than an even balance. Mills 
have been prompt to take advantage of impi-oved machinery in 
the past, as they universally use high-speed spindles and are thor- 
oughly committed to the revolving top flat card. Neither of 
these changes J however, can show more than a fraction of the 
profit possible with our loom, for the saving in weaving is more 
than the entire cost of carding with the picker-room thrown in, 
and more than the entire cost of spinning." 

"New mills are flooding us with orders, and old mills must 



33 



realize that equality in competition demands equality of equip- 
ment." 

"We used to claim that weavers could attend Northrop 
Looms in the proportion of two to one common. The users are 
finding this prediction far too moderate as the}' often run three 
to four times their former limit. In several mills weavers are 
paid less than one-half the former price for weaving cloth per 
•cut, and yet make higher wages than when running common 
looms. 

A mill that cannot appreciate that statement simplv cannot 
appreciate the tale told b}- concrete figures. Those who attempt 
to sell cloth handicapped by an extra cost of from one cent per 
pound upward, can cling to their obsolete common looms while 
their more enterprising neighbors glean the profits." 

"We begin to feel cjuite independent in our loom trade, as 
the results of experience have proved that our position is abso- 
lutely unassailable. A few facts speak for themselves : Good 
weavers rtmning 34 to 32 print looms and 20 3-harness looms." 

"In one large print mill the average number of looms per 
v^eaver is 18." 

"We are employing more hands than ever worked before in 
an American Cotton Machine Shop and are enlarging our plant 
in every direction." 

"Every new idea meets the same opposition, goes through 
the same routine. In the first few years this machine had to 
bear the brunt of criticism, antagonism, doubt, fear, and mis- 
representation. Now it suddenly sweeps away opposition, flood- 
ing us with orders, and necessitating the doubling of our plant. 
We intend to keep abreast of the demand if pig iron and steel 
can be obtained in sufficient quantity." 

"It is an interesting problem to note how much longer the 
old mills can continue competition, when handicapped by the 
obsolete common loom." 



34 



1901. 

"With a record of 75^000 looms sold, it is no longer neces- 
sary for us to predict what these looms wdll do. 

We point to what they have done." 

"Although our order list lengthens and strengthens, we do 
not adopt the simple and inexpensive plan of building without 
change, but continual!}' add improvements whenever possible." 

"We shipped more than 16,000 complete Northrop looms 
during the last year. What better testimonial of value could be 
presented? With our new plant and enlarged facilities we shall 
easilv beat that record in 1901. 

This simply means that those running common looms must 
expect a continuously harsher coinpetition." 

"Having adopted a business founded on improvements in 
cotton machinery, the habit of striving after perfection leads us, 
at times, to give the public more than they have required. Al- 
though the Northrop loom has sold faster than we could supply 
the trade, we have recently made many expensive changes, in 
spite of the fact that our customers, if ignorant of their existence, 
would probably have ne^-er realized the need of them. All 
loom improvements tend toward increased cost of construction. 
We have taken the common loom and not only applied import- 
ant attachments, but have also raised its mechanical grade." 

"Every loom that v\'e sell furnishes an additional argument 
for replacement of common looms, as each Northrop Loom in- 
creases the competition that its rivals must endure. 

Those having common looms must admit that, sooner or 
later, the Northrop loom, or some similar type, will replace 
them. Then vsdiy delay? Every vear of postponement could 
have helped to pay the cost. Those who are waiting for the 
similar type to be developed can hardly find a large degree of 
encouragement from the present situation. They used to wait, 
in the same wav, for spindles of possible competing capacity in 



35 



earlier ^•ears. They waited fi^'e, ten, twenty years, — and then 
finally fell into line, after losing a large share of their compara- 
tive value. Some of them lost time and money in experiments 
with inferior stvles, and history will undoubtedly repeat itself. 
Some insist on patronizing cheap doctors, cheap lawyers, and 
cheap eggs. Perhaps they are satisfied with the results. Our 
loom is not cheap in price, but is certainly cheap at the price." 

'■'■The success of the Northrop Loom has forced a series of 
wide spreading events. 

It has delivered the trade in looms, for plain fabrics, of the 
United States, over to a compan}' which had never sold one 
loom prior to 1S95. It has stimulated the building of new mills 
and the increase of the American textile industry to an extent 
never before known. It has forced us to more than double our 
plant, and more than treble our number of operatives. 

The profits have been shared with the manufacturer, who 
has cheapened production ; and by the laborer, who has recei^'ed 
better wages. 

While common loom mills are shut down, Northrop loom 
mills continue running." 

"•We shipped more than 35,000 complete Northrop looms 
during the eighteen months of Januar}-, 1900, to July, 1901. 
What better testimonial of value could be presented? Southern 
mills are taking their share, but there are still thousands of old 
looms that ought .to be replaced." 

'■'■We shipped nearls' 6,000 looms in the first three months 
of the year 1901. 

Facts like these carrv conviction to those of average 
comprehension. We shipped over 9,000 Northrop looms from 
our works in the six months ending July i, 1901. Further com- 
ment is unnecssarv." 

'■'■We enter on the seventh vear of our loom business with 



36 



an enormous order list, a doubled plant, and a reputation estab- 
lished by the experience of our customers. 

Every claim has been justified, every assertion proved. 

The Northrop Loom does halve the labor cost of weaving, 
does make better goods, and does earn dividends for its pvir- 
chasers. 

Having absolutely removed the common loom from compe- 
tition, so far as new sales are concerned, we may next have to 
spare some slight consideration for the nuishroom element of 
automatic svibstitutes designed to share the fruits of our victory. 
Let none of us get unduly excited, however, until their trial has 
proved them worthy of attention." 

"We started to apply attachments to looms in order to make 
them more automatic. We soon found it necessary to first 
improve the loom itself. We believe that we are turning out a 
weaving machine fit to class with other developed mill machin- 
ery, and not a cheap mass of ill fitting parts, half wood, half 
metal, nursed into efficiency with bits of leather and string. 

Our castings are machine moulded to ensure uniformity. 
They are drilled in jigs and assembled to gauges. We use iron 
and steel wherever possible. We know we put more exjDense 
into this loom than any other builder of similar machines. We 
are not content with having already done a larger loom business 
per year than any competitor. We see no reason why we should 
not sell all the looms needed for plain weaving." 

"Our total sales to date, including old looms changed over, 
amount to over 74,000. 

We have built up a modern plant of large capacity in order 
to meet the demands of our customers, and now have 22 acres 
of floor space in connected buildings, the greater part of which 
represents recent construction. 

We are now ready for increased business and await it with 
a confidence based on the evolution of the past. It may be 



37 



noticed that v\'e refer more often to the amount of our sales than 
to the details of our products. The latter course \vould simply 
illustrate our opinion, while sales illustrate the opinion of our 
customers — and that counts." 

"We know no half-truths in mechanics. 

A machine is either efficient or incapable — superior or infe- 
rior. 

The Northrop Loom has now been running in large quanti- 
ties for more than six years. Its success is proved by the fre- 
quency of orders from those having the knowledge that comes 
with use. Some of the earlier customers have lately wished to 
actually duplicate those first machines part for part. 

But ^ve build a better loom now. 

We have an experience gained by continued construction 
and experiment. We have vastly increased our range and our 
variety of models. We cannot only show a purchaser important 
novelties, but can refer to successful operation in an}' of the 
ordinary lines of application." 



1902. 

"■The largest single order we have 3-et taken has just been 
placed with us for Northrop Looms by the Grosvenor Dale Co., 
of North Grosvenor Dale (and Grosvenor Dale) , Conn. 

These looms were chosen after lengthy and continued trial 
of former lots. These were used in a wide variet}' of cloth, 
including various standard weaves for which the Grosvenor 
Dale Company has long been famous. Those who have been 
cautiously awaiting the outcome of others' experiments may 
now perceive the verification of our earlier contentions." 

"■The Spindle and the Loom. 

Our first ten years of spindle sales, about 3,000,000. 



38 



Ovir thirty years of spindle sales, about 20,000,000. 

Every prominent mill in the country uses them in their 
Spinning Frames or Twisters. 

And yet in the first ten years the introduction was compara- 
tively slow. 

Our first seven years of loom sales figvn-e over 75,000 (in- 
cluding looms changed over), and there are only about 375,000 
looms in this country to which our improvements are at present 
adaptable. 

Every mill that waited to change spindles made a mistake. 
They admit it by their present policy. 

A less proportion are making the mistake of indecision in 
the loom line, but the conservative, are still ruining their chance 
in the same old way. 

Every year of delay means just so much lost profit. The 
above figures of fact prove more than pages of argument. 
Think them over." 

"On June ist our unfilled orders for complete Northrop 
Looms figured exactly 15,701 — and the boom has hardly started." 

"Our unfilled orders for complete Northrop Looms figured 
exactly 21,586 July ist, 1902. The boom is beginning to boom." 

'■^Delegations of foreign business men, operatives and labor 
leaders have been visiting this country to investigate the claimed 
advantages of our Northrop Loom. 

We started selling them eight years ago and have averaged 
sales of over 10,000 per year. 

Outsiders are becoming alarmed and yet there are American 
mills still blindly buying common looms. 

Not that we have any reason to complain. It takes a 
doubled plant to keep pace with our orders — but it ought to take 
a trebled plant." 

"In spite of loom shipments during August of 1799 looms, 



39 



our unfilled orders still amounted to over 30,000 September ist, 
1902." 

"Out of 64, '540 looms now running or ordered by the single 
state of South Carolina, 37,980 are Northrop Looms." 

"30,000 looms to build. 20,000 Northrop Looms. Equiv- 
alent in cost to 60,000 common looms. 10 months' work at 2,000 
looms per month and new orders coming in all the time. Works 
must be increased again. 300,000 looms yet to be replaced in 
the United States alone, and new mills being organized. Such 
is the situation confronting the Draper Company of Hopedale, 
Mass." 



1903. 

"We shipped 15,746 complete Northrop Looms in 1902, 
and applied besides, 1,028 filling changers and 1,234 warp-stop 
devices to looms in mills. 

We commenced the new vear by shipping 3,500 complete 
looms the first month. 

Let the good work go on." 

"Our present output of Northrop looms, over 2,000 per 
month. The majority of new orders are placed by Southern 
Cotton Mills." 

"We have today sold over 80,000 complete Northrop looms. 
We have applied attachments, in addition, to over 15,000 looms. 
We figvu"e that there are still 350,000 looms that must be 
replaced. They will vanish as surelv as the common spindle 
and the old style card. We are enlarging our plant to prepare 
for their elimination. Li a certain well known mill six weavers 
and four boys to fill hoppers run 216 Northrop looms. In an- 



40 



other mill no weaver runs less than 34 Northrop looms. Facts 
like these breed conclusions." 

"We have a new^ Northrop Loom that should be of interest 
to w^eavers of print cloth and similar goods. It has the latest 
large pattern hopper, our steel-harness warp stop-motion with 
simplified knock-off, a double fork to prevent thick and thin 
places, the simplest take-up ever devised, our improved 
Draper-Roper let-off, and a new device called the Anti-bang, 
which prevents jar and breakage when a shuttle is trapped. 
We call it the J model. Large orders already being filled." 



41 



THB PRESENT STANDING OF OUR 
LOOM— APRIL, 1904, 

A record of over 100,000 looms actually introduced within 
a period of nine years, sold at prices equivalent to three times 
the cost of the common looms with which they compete, is cer- 
tainly sufficient evidence that the Northrop loom has come to 
stay. The amount thus paid us for Northrop looms would actu- 
ally replace three-quarters of the common cotton looms now 
running in the whole United States. As our last year's sales 
w^ere larger than those of any previous year, it is evident that 
the introduction is not based on any quick enthusiasm, or false 
data. 

We started with the assumption that the Northrop loom 
would enable the weaver to produce a doubled product ; in fact, 
before even making this modest assertion, we proved its truth to 
our own satisfaction by running a weave room of eighty looms 
in our own works, for many months, open to the inspection of 
hundreds of practical mill men. The first looms that we put 
out were therefore seasoned, as it were, by experience; in fact, 
the first models ran so well that we have been asked in recent 
years to duplicate them. 

It is no slight task to introduce an improved machine which 
aims at replacing the entire equipment of the most important 
section of one of the greatest industries in the world. It cannot 
be done in one year, or one decade. Nothing within our mem- 
ory has so completely ousted competition as the high speed spin- 
dle ; and yet comparison of sales will prove that our loom has 
met with readier appreciation in the earlier years. There are 
still several hundred thousand common looms which should be 
replaced, and which will be replaced. The delay is not due to 



42 



hesitation based on disbelief, but rather a hesitation based on 
financial conditions. With new mills, where capital is raised by 
subscription, equipment with Northrop looms is becoming a mat- 
ter of course : but an old mill faces a serious proposition when 
considering the replacement of an entire division of its plant, 
where the surplus is not sufficient to meet the cost, and where 
stockholders are not inclined to pay assessments, or take new 
stock. The mills that have a comparatively new eqviipment of 
common looms are naturally indisposed to reduce their valuation 
by considering them practically worthless for active use. We are, 
however, selling tons of looms for junk, that are equal, if not 
better, than similar looms still bought by a few obstinate adherents 
to obsolete methods. There is also a class of overshrewd managers 
who wait in hope that competition may reduce ovir prices, or that 
patents will expire in time to force a reduction to meet 
their demands. Nine years of constant introduction finds the 
anxious ones still waiting the possible competitor; and the con- 
stant improvement, with continual issue of important patents, 
assures us that our hold on this line will continue beyond the 
time to which their hopes might limit us. Meanwhile these 
waiting ^Durchasers are losing the possible profits of use. The 
fact that they may be making favorable showings by reason of 
"luck" in purchase of cotton, especial advantage in situation, 
labor, or power, cannot disguise the fact that with the Northrop 
loom their profits would be still higher. 

When we refer to the Northrop loom improvements, we are 
speaking primarily, of the filling-changer, the warp stop-motion, 
and their co-operating parts. Before our application of 
these devices, there had never been a successful use of 
filling-changing devices of any nature, and warp stop- 
motions were only used in a very limited field, a few in- 
stances being known of their application to special classes of 
double warp weaving. There is hardly any vital change in any 



43 

line of mechanics, which so suddenly brought successful auto- 
matic mechanism into extensive use, without the preliminary 
record of long use of partially successful devices of similar nature. 
This fact is particularly curious, in view of the fact that a warp 
stop-motion was one of the inventions disclosed in the original 
power loom specification of Cartwright, as shown in his patent 
of 1784. Many inventors had struggled for years with the prob- 
lem of automatic change of shuttles. The inventor of the Nor- 
throp filling-changing devices, however, borrowed practically 
nothing from the former art in this line, and when it was found 
necessary to incorporate a warp stop-motion with the fillmg- 
changer, there was nothing formerly developed that could be 
adopted, and inventors practically started in this field also with- 
out the aid of prior thought. 

Neither the filling-changer nor the warp stop-motion neces- 
sarily increases production in the loom itself. The filling-changer 
does " save time formerly occupied in changing shuttles by 
hand, with the loom stopped, but the warp-stop-motion actually 
decreases production by stopping the loom oftener than it would 
be stopped in the common practice of plain weaving. The com- 
bination of the two devices, however, allows the operative to 
multiply efficiency ; for the filling-changer replaces labor, and the 
warp stop-motion relieves the annoyance of constant oversight. 
To appreciate the great saving introduced by the filling-changer, 
it may be well to note the operations gone through by a weaver 
on a plain loom, when the filling is exhausted. They follow in 
the sequence now recorded, the weaver performing the following 
functions : 

I. Releases the shipper brake. 
3. Pushes the lay back. 

3. Withdraws the shuttle. 

4. Puts the reserve shuttle in the shuttle box on the lay. 

5. Pulls the shipper handle to start the loom. 



44 



6. Rubs the cloth below the breast beam to prevent a thin 
place, if light goods are being woven. 

7. Picks up the discarded shuttle again. 

8. Pulls the shuttle spindle out on an angle. 

9. Removes the empty bobbin or cop tube. 

10. Puts in a new bobbin or cop. 

11. Pulls off a sufficient length of filling. 

12. Snaps the shuttle spindle back into place. 

13. Holds the filling over the shuttle eye entrance. 

14. Sucks the filling through the eye. 

15. Places the shuttle in its holder, where it remains until 
needed. 

Now^, this series of performances must be gone through with 
every time the filling is exhausted. On one loom, the filling may 
run from one minute to twenty minutes, according to the size of 
the yarn and the amount of yarn in the shuttle. The average 
time is perhaps six minutes, especially if we count the number of 
times that the weaver must come to the loom to start it up when 
the filling breaks. With a loom having an average of six min- 
utes between such stops, the weaver must come to the loom once 
every ten minutes. If running eight looms, he w^ould have such 
a duty nearly once a minute. With the Northrop loom, on the 
contrary, the weaver can fill a hopper containing 35 bobbins, 
which, vi^ith the same average of running time, would last two 
hours and a half, without requiring attendance. But a co-opera- 
ting feature of great advantage with the Northrop loom is the fact 
that the weaver can fill the hoppers when convenient, rather 
than be forced to come to the looms with irritating regularity. 

Referring to the associate attachment, the Warp Stop-Mo- 
tion, it is, of course, vs^ell known that the warp threads v^^ill break 
in weaving. On a common loom, the broken thread will not be 
raised by its heddle, and thereby leaves an open space in the 
cloth, more or less visible to the eye, according to the character 



45 

of the goods woven. Very often the broken end gets tangled 
around adjacent threads between the harness and the reed, hold- 
ing several of them either above or below the tip of the shuttle, 
which therefore causes a defect known technically as a "float" or 
"overshot." If the weaver does not notice the fault promptly, 
the extra strain will break many of the warp threads, and in any 
event, a pickout is necessary. In some mills, a weaver is forced 
to stop all looms under his charge while attending to a pickout. 
It is not necessary to explain the trouble caused by these defects 
to any weaving expert. The temples must be pulled back, all 
the filling threads that have been laid since the tangle commenced 
removed by a tedious combing operation, the warp beam must be 
turned back, the tension of the cloth properly adjusted, and the 
loom again set in motion. 

When we first applied filling-changing devices, we found 
that the weaver, although greatly relieved of manual labor, was 
even more uneasy, on account of possible overshots, having more 
looms to look after. We saw that it was absolutely necessary to 
furnish a protection in the way of an accurate warp stop-motion, 
so that there should be no mental anxiety whatever, and no neces- 
sity for alert observation. It took our inventors several years to 
produce a practical mechanism of this nature ; in fact, the intro- 
duction of the Filling Changer itself was delayed for ciuite a 
period while waiting for the associate mechanism. With the 
protection of the Warp Stop-Motion, a weaver is only limited in 
the number of looms attended, by the amount of warp breaks 
which must be repaired, and the number of bobbins which can be 
put into the hoppers within the time to be given. Under present 
systems, Northrop loom weavers are usually relieved of oiling and 
cleaning their looms, so that apart from the warp and filling 
duties, they have practically nothing to attend to, save the re- 
moval of the cloth. 



46 




PERSPECTIVE VIEW OF LARGE HOPPER, ORIGI- 
NAL DESIGN. 



Taking the ^'arious attachments in order for detailed consid- 
eration, we shall consider the Hopper first, as the more import- 
ant element of the whole combination. The cut shows the 
"Large Hopper," or "24-Bobbin Hopper." It is operated 
in rotation by the reverse motion of the transferrer. Our 
latest forms have a new and impro^-ed bobbin support, 



47 




provided with a leather washer cushion to preAent breakage, 
and we are also using a new form of bobbin tip holder, 
which will take either bobbins or cops, as desired. We start- 
ed with a hopper that held a supply of 14 extra bobbins, 
but the change to the 24-bobbin hopper has proved a distinct ad- 
vantage, removing the Northrop loom still further from competi- 
tion with the possible perfected Shuttle-Changing loom, which 
would probably be limited to a reserve supply of six or eight 
shuttles. We proved by an absokite test on our old hopper, that 
a reduction in the number of bobbins held in reserve, placed an 
absolute restriction on the weaver's capacity ; and the converse of 
the proposition is a natural sequence. 

A vital principle of the Northrop invention is contained in 
the Shuttle, which is adapted not only to hold a bobbin or cop 
skewer, but to hold it so that it may be automatically removed 
by the entrance of a new bobbin or cop skewer. The spring 
jaws of the Northrop shuttle co-operate with the rings or ribs, 
on the bobbin or cop skewer, so as to hold either one normally 



48 



Our first 
Large Hopper. 
Holds twenty- 
four extra bob- 
bins. Is rotated 
by reverse action 
of transferrer. 





Present pattern 
Large Hopper. 
New end hold- 
ers adapted for 
either bobbins or 
cop skewers. Also 
new bobbin sup- 
port, and thread 
discs with wider 
surfaces for thread 
to bear against. 



49 



in proper horizontal position, and yet liberate them quickly 
when opened by the entrance of the new filling-holder, pressed 
into the shuttle from the hopper when the transferrer is in 
motion. The Transferrer is a simple pivoted lever with a 
hammer head, normally in position over the lowest bobbin 
in the hopper. A pivoted dog attached to a crank arm on the 
transferrer is normally out of reach of a moving part on the lay 
•called a "Bunter." When the supply of filling in the running 
shuttle is either broken, or exhausted, the ordinary weft fork de- 
tects the fault and by simple co-operation with a moving shaft 
raises the dog aforesaid to meet the impact of the bunter, thereby 
transfering the foi^ward movement of the lay through the trans- 
ferrer pivot, to press the transferrer head down onto the reserve 
bobbin in the hopper, and push it into the shuttle. The bobbin 
formerly in the shuttle falls through the exit opening of the shut- 
tle, down onto a guiding chute into a large box, or receptacle, 
attached to the loom side. 

Reference to the cuts, which show various views of the shut- 
tles, bobbins and cop skevs^ers, will make the operation clear. 

It is not only necessary that the new bobbin should be placed 
properly in the shuttle, but it is vitally necessary that the thread 
on the new bobbin should enter the shuttle eye, so that it maybe 
properly drawn off in weaving. The threads of the bobbins in 
the hopper are wound round a stud in the center of the rotating 
hopper itself ; and when a bobbin is transferred to the shuttle and 
the shuttle is thrown by the picker-stick, the thread still held by 
the hopper disc automatically enters the slotted eye of the shuttle ; 
the final position, however, not being attained until the shuttle 
has been thrown back from the opposite side of the loom. 

It is quite evident that when the shuttle receives the bobbin 
it must be under the hopper in approximately correct position. 
Variation is allowed by reason of the several notches in the shut- 
tle spring, and also by reason of an incline, which guides the 



50 



bobbin down into the spring, even if the shuttle be quite a dis- 
tance out of place. To protect against any abnormal position, 
which would cause the incoming bobbin to strike a solid part of 
the shuttle and cause breakage, we provide a device known as the 
"Shuttle Position Detector," which reaches a finger across the 
front of the shuttle whenever the dog on the transferrer is raised. 
If the shuttle is in the path of this finger, the dog will not be 
raised sufficiently to encounter the 
bunter, and therefore no transfer will 
take place. If this be twice repeated, 
the loom stops automatically by a de- 
vice called the misthread stop-motion, 
attached to the fork slide, so that the 
wea^'er knows that the shuttle is not 
being properly picked. The same 
mechanism will also stop the loom, pro- 
viding the hopper is exhausted, or pro- 
viding the shuttle fails twice to thread, 
or "misthreads," as we term the opera- 
ation. It will be remembered that the 
thread on the incoming bobbin is at- 
tached to a stud on the hopper. It 
therefore extends from the stud to the 
cloth, and, if not attended to, v\^ould 
break in time from the strain, as the 
cloth moves towards the take-up roll, 
Early form of Thread- and the snapped end might fly into the 
Cutting Temple. cloth. We therefore provide a Thread- 

Cutting device, attached to the regular 
temple, ^vhich operates from the motion of the lay to sever any 
such threads close to the selvage. As it operates every time the 
lay beats forward, it has many chances to cut the thread. 




51 




Later form of Thread-Cutting Temple. 



Made with soHd heel so that a loose heel will not bring 
extra strain on the cutter and cause the temple to be reciprocated 
through the cutter. 

It may be noticed that Filling-Changing mechanism includes 
five distinct and separate devices, namely ; the Filling-Changer 
itself, the Shuttle, the Shuttle Position Detector, the Misthread 
Stop-Motion and the Thread-Cutting Temple. There are, 
therefore, several distinct lines, all covered by patents, many of 
which extend much longer than the original patents on the origi- 
nal mechanism. 



53 



As shown, the transferrer is placing the bobbin in the 
shuttle, the clog being in engagement with the bunter on the lay. 
The empty bobbin is falling clown the chute into the box. The 
chute as first designed was a movable part, independent of the 
lay itself. 

This cut was made from our first model loom and happens 
to show' the hopper on the left side, we making hoppers in rights 
and lefts at that time. 



54 




CROSS-SECTION OF A NO. 1 COP-HOPPER WITH 
TRANSFER TAKING PLACE. 

The entering cop skewer has just started the pressure that 
expels the one in the shuttle. It has still to move some distance 
down the chute to reach the box. The expelled skewer is not 
empty in this instance, as it illustrates a case in which the 
filling;- thread broke while weaving. 



:)3 




DETAIL OF CONNECTION 

Between the fillinj^' fork which detects the absence of filHng 
and a No. i cop hopper or magazhie. 



56 




ILLUSTRATION OF HOPPER ACTION ON B MODEL 

LOOM. 



57 



A is the filling-fork which detects absence of filling, and 
through the usual catch and vibrator gives action to rod B con- 
trolling latch C. 

When latch is raised it v^^ill be in contact wath a bunter on 
the lay, thus forcibly depressing the transferrer D which pushes 
a bobbin from the hopper into the shuttle beneath it, at the same 
time expelling the one carried by the shuttle, which is then 
guided into the large tin box held on the loom side. 

E is a portion of the device which determines the position 
of the shuttle in the box. If not properly in place the latch C 
will not engage the bunter, as the device of which E is a part 
will be prevented from further movement by contact with the 
shuttle tip, and as E and C work in unison, the movement of C 
is also checked. This special shuttle position detector did not go 
into extensive use on our own looms but was adopted as standard 
by our Canadian licensees. 



58 

A f:ew of the 

SHUTTI^FS USED 
WITH OUR NOR- 
THROP LOOMS. 



Shuttle at the left 
is k n o w n as the 
"Keeley," although in- 
corporating the spring 
of J. H. Northrop and 
the incline cover of G. 
O. Draper. 



Shuttle at right is 
known as No. 7 
in our shop records. 
It has what we know- 
as the "Stimpson" eye. 
This first model had 
no friction pocket and 
the eye casting was 
held by a nut on the 
bottom. 



59 



No. 1 6 Shuttle. 
Stimpsou improved eye 
with pocket for flannel 
friction, the casting be- 
ing held in the shuttle 
body by a transverse bolt 
and nut. Various mod- 
ifications have other 
numbers, but this is 
the regular standard de- 
sign which has gone 
into most extensive use. 









No. 167 Shuttle. 
Stimpson special eye 
and new spring and cov- 
er. A very satisfactory 
model. Note the new 
spring and cover v\diich 
leave the wood of the 
shuttle body less cut out 
and therefore stronger. 
We have little trouble 
with loose springs in 
this design. 



1.1 ,'i 



<i I 



l.|l III 



1 1' r ! 



6o 



|0 



No. 263 Shuttle, or Jonas Northrop Eye 
style. Very successful on cops and coarse fil- 
ling ; in fact, the best threading eye which we 
have for all classes of work. 

This shuttle saves filling breakage and 
makes misthreading iminaterial. 

We recommend it unreservedlv until a 
better design is possible. 



6i 




NORTHROP LOOM BOBBINS AND COP SKEWERS. 



No. I. 

No. 2. 
No. 3. 
No. 4. 
No. 5. 



Represents our early type of bobbin — now discarded. 

First abandonment of groove at base. 

Standard pattern with Claus step for ordinary yarn. 

Special Qiieen City pattern. 

Standard for coarse filling. Note also the base 
on this and No. 6, made larger than formerly. We fit all our 
new looms to take this bobbin, as it has greater strength and is 
less affected by reaming. Of course, all the other patterns can 
have this same base. In ordering filling spindles for these bob- 
bins be careful and specify the large cup. 

No. 6. Special metal base cover extending under bobbin 
rings to prevent their loosening. A most important improve- 
ment. 



62 



T 



C^-3 




I mi ' I 





lO 



No. 7- Feeler bobbin for use with feeler or mispick pre- 
venter loom. This style has three rings on base. Note cham- 
fer on rings at ends. We have all our rings made in this way 
now, as they are less liable to catch yarn in the spinning-room. 

No. 8. Long traverse bobbin, special notches on barrel. 

No. 9. Long traverse bobbin with ordinary ribs. 

No. 10. Cop skewer. 



63 



Our bobbins and cop skewers are made in three lengths. 

1. 6 3-4 inches long for traverse of ^ 1-3 inches. 

2. 7 3-8 " " " " " 6 t-S " 

3. S " " " '^ " 6 3-4 " 

The exteriors shown in the cuts are used on all three lengths. 

We have manv additional contours to suit the whims of 
customers, but those shown are approved by use. 

All bobbins and cop skewers must be ordered from us. 
They are patented articles. 

We insist on this simply to protect the successful operation 
of our looms. We do not take profit enough to pay us for the 
trouble in handling this part of the business. 



'*A few uights ao'o the night watchman of the mill told of seeing 
strange sights and hearing queer noises during the small houi-s of the 
morning. He is a sober man of middle age and in perfect health, so it 
was hard to find reason for not believing his story- 
He says that shortly after midnight he heard a noise in a remote 
corner of the mill like the running of weaving looms. He went there 
and found six looms running at full speed without any apparent motive 
power and cloth was being woven without any guidance." — \_From dis- 
patch to the New York World, Nov. 17, 1900. 



"The Northrop-Draper loom has had many tests and made 
many records. We will now chronicle one that, in romance, sur- 
passes the loom of this make at Tucapau mills, Wellford, S. C, 
which ran nearly 24 hours without stopping a second : 

—Young couple engaged — against wishes father — hurried con- 
sultation — wedding party g'atliered in the dynamo-room — retuined — 
the bride finding all her Northrop looms running along as merri- 
ly as ever.''— [I'extile Excelsior. 



64 




STEEL 11AUN1-:SS KNOCK- 
OFF. 

This (.-111 illiislr;itrs ;i linriu'ss 
warp stdp-iiuil ion as used on soiiir 
of oiii' looms. The \ihralors arc 
rockrd I'idin a cam moxcmcnl on 
tiu- low'i'i- shall and tlu' trip acts 
dii'c'cl l\' on llu' shipper. 



65 



WARP STOP-MOTIONS. 

At the stall ol oil)- loom introduction, wc limited oursclvcK 
to the weaving of two-harness goods, utilizing simple warp stop- 
motion devices, which were perfectly efllcient in this held. 
.When we began to supj)ly looms to weave with 3, 4 and 5 har- 
nesses, together with the field covered by dobljies, it fjecame 
necessary to develfjp new designs, so that we now have four dis- 
tinct styles of warp slo])-molion, anrl modifications in each class. 
Whenever |)ossible, we recommend the use oi our steel harness 
stop-motion. This has only been adapted to more tlian two har- 
ness work in recent years. With this arrangement, the heddles 
themselves serve as warp-stop detectors, being thin, (lat steel 
ribbons, sufficiently stiff to act in arresting the tnotion of a 
vibrator. The heddles are strung on bars, through slots much 
wider than the bars themselves; thus when a tliread breaks 
the heddle may droj) a distance equivalent to the extra length of 
the slot, and thus come within the path of a moving vibrator 
which, when arrested, effects the stopping of the loom by inter- 
mediate mechanisms. 

The advantages of the Steel J farness Warp Stop-Motion 
over all other kinds are numerous. Iti the first place, the heddles 
themselves are practically indestructible. They show no signs of 
wear after years of use; in fact, they are probably better for use, 
through the polishing given by the passing threads. The cotton 
harness, with which they compete, wears out, needs revarnishing 
and proLably averages an expense for repair and replacement of 
perhaps a dollar a h>om j)er year. We see no reason why the 
steel harness should not wear at least twenty years, saving some 
nineteen dollars in actual outlay, if our premises are correct. 
Another important advantage, especially noticeable with coarse 
yarn, is the saving of expense in drawing-in. Cotton harness 



66 



warp stop-motions, with additional warp-stop detectors, cost more 
to drav\' in, because the drawing-in hand has to draw threads 
through the detectors as well as through the reed and harness. 
Our steel harness is even easier to draw in than the cotton har- 
ness, for the heddles.may slide on the bars at will, accommodat- 
ing themselves to the convenience of the operative. Another ad- 
vantage of the .steel heddle warp-stop is that it will stop more 
promptly, preventing warp runs after warp breakage ; and it does 
not stop so often for slack threads. A further advantage, of great 
importance in mills where they change the product frequently, is 
that the steel harness heddles space themselves automatically, so 
that the same harness may be used for various weaves. The 
free lateral mo\ement also allows the weaver readier access 
when repairing broken \\^arp threads. 

We have been asked more than once why it is that the shut- 
tles in a Northrop loom fail to throw out of the loom like the 
common shuttle ; in fact, our shuttles stay in the shade so uni- 
formh- as to question the need for shuttle guards. The reason 
is easilv seen on investigation. Shuttles are thrown out of looms 
for several possible causes, but the most frequent one is the 
formation of floats, or the preliminary to a pickout. All of our 
looms will stop before a float can make serious trouble, and our 
steel harness warp-stop type will stop the loom before the warp 
threads can tangle sufliciently to swerve the shuttle from its 
proper course. 

In the line of steel heddle warp-stops we are absolutely with- 
out competition. No other loom builder has ever attempted to 
introduce this class of devices, to our knowledge. 

In the earlier use of the steel harness, it was claimed that 
the steel heddles broke more warp threads than the twine har- 
ness. This may have been true at that time ; yet the ad^■antages 
were more than enough to compensate. After learning proper 
methods of sizing, proper shape of cams and proper arrange- 



67 



r 



No. 



3 



ment of heddle.s in their 
frames, we have now brought 
the steel heddle warp-stop 
where it is practically equal 
to the cotton harness in the 
number of warp faults. On 
regular print weaving, we 
find the stops for both breaks 
and slack threads combined, is 
between lo and 15 per day, 
per loom, with either steel 
heddles or cotton harness. 

At present, we do not sup- 
ply steel harness mechanisms 
for a greater number than five 
harnesses. 

The original cotton har- 
ness warp stop-motion which 
we introduced, used a drop 
wire device applied between 
the heddles and the lease rods, 
each detector serving for two 
or more threads. This could 
be used on looms having more 
than two harnesses, in a large 
number of applications. This 
motion was very successful 
and has been used on thou- 
sands of looms. We are re- 
cently applying a stop-motion 
situated between the lease rods and the harness, but which uses 
one detector for each thread, which looks very promising for 
cotton harness work with anv number of hainesses. 



No. 3 



No. I 


Steel heddle. 


No. 2 


Cotton harness drop 




wire for "Roper" 




warp stop. 


No. 3 


Detector for single- 




thi-ead stop-motion. 



68 



A fourth type is known as our Single-Thread Warp Stop- 
Motion, and has been very largely used in recent years. In this 
class, one detector acts for each thread, and a peculiarity is 
noticed in that the detectors are arranged in two banks, and 
placed in the position of the usual lease rods, where they ac- 
complish the functions of leasing devices, as well as warp stop- 
motions, doing away with the necessity for leasing rods, and 
simplifying the loom to that extent. Where drop wires are 
applied back of the usual lease rods, a broken warp thread does 
not always promptly allow the drop to operate, as the lease rods 
sometimes make sufficient friction on the thread to hold the 
drop in position. 

While we are subject to more or less competition in applying 
warp stop-motions to old looms, ovu" competitors are either lim- 
ited to use of electrical devices, with their inherent evils, or to 
the use of warp stop-motions in which the detectors are subject 
to a more or less severe twisting strain. Our patents cover the 
use of serrated vibrators which can engage the detectors without 
twisting and bending. Sometimes the vibrators and co-operat- 
ing devices on competing devices are made light and delicate, 
in order not to bend the drops, and therefore are less positive in 
action, and more liable to damage. So far as the application of 
warp stop-motions to other than Northrop looms is concerned, 
we ^/vere interested primarily in applying warp stop-motions to 
looms that could not use the filling-changer, such as drop box 
looms. We have taken little interest in attempting to introduce 
warp stop-motions on common looms for plain weaving, because 
we consider such application a mere makeshift, in view of the 
greater advantages of the combined filling-changing and warp- 
stop, which the mills should avail themselves of, rather than 
attempt to try and cheapen their weaving by adding expensive 
devices to old machinery. Warp stop-motions of themselves, 
do not lessen the weaver's labor, except in the prevention of 



69 



floats and overshots. Every thread that breaks must be pieced 
up, as formerly, and it is even possible that the additional 
weig'ht of the detectors causes more breakage. 




DEVICES FOR MAKING PERFECT 

CLOTH. 

The third nevs^ attachment introduced with the advent of the 
Northrop Filling-Changer and the Warp Stop-Motion, is a mech- 
anism only used on certain classes of goods, which co-opei-ates 
with the filling-changer to prevent mispicks, and thus make per- 
fect cloth. Mispicks are due to the running out, or breakage of 
filling, and the insertion of new filling without removing the par- 



70 



ticular thread of w^eft remaining in the shed, and also without in- 
serting the new filling in the proper shed. In the general line o£ 
goods woven, mispicks have not been considered as important 
defects, but with other goods, such as napped fabrics and certain 
classes of multiple hai'ness weaving, mispicks are not allowable. 
In common loom weaving, they may be obviated by extra pains 
and extra labor on the part of the operative, who can pick out 
the particular thread by hand, and turn the loom over to find the 
true shed before inserting the full shuttle. With automatic 
looms, the prevention of mispicks is attained by changing the filr 
ling before final exhaustion, so that a full thread is left in ever^r 
shed. If the filling should break, the loom may be stopped au- 
tomatically, so that the weaver can find the pick ; or, if such 
breakage is not frequent, the loom may be arranged to run the 
chance of a mispick at such periods. 

The mechanism employed for this purpose consists of a 
simple device called the "Feeler," because it feels of the weft in 
the shuttle through an opening in the shuttle side, and absolutely 
measures its volume. When reduced to a cei'tain definite quan- 
tity, the feeler operates to liberate mechanism governing the ac- 
tion of the filling-changing devices. 

The cut first printed shows our latest feeler, which is applied 
at the shipper end of the loom. As shown, it is in contact with 
the yarn in the shuttle, passing through a hole in the front box 
plate and a slot in the side of the shuttle itself. Like the 
Aumann feeler, on the opposite page, it is independent of 
back lash in lay and position of front plate. The operating 
parts are shown in full relief, and are few in number. The 
cuts of the Aumann feeler show the pattern in use just previous. 
The mechanism at this side end of the loom, however, does not 
accomplish all that is necessary, for the operation of the 
filling-changer by a feeler introduces a curious problem, the 
ejected bobbin having its thread extended through the shuttle 



71 



^-^ 




AUMANN FEELER JUST BEFORE OPERATION. 

This cut shows the form of feeler mechanism devised by 
Mr. Louis A. Aumann, agent of the Dwight Mfg. Co. at Chic- 
opee and modified by inventions of W. F. and C. H. Draper. 




AUMANN FEELER OPERATING. 

We have had these applied to thousands of looms. They are 
independent of the vs'ear or alteration in the throw of the lay 
and therefore require practically no adjustment after the first 
setting". 



72 



eye to the cloth, while the bobbin itself is in the receptacle, 
thus leaving an additional thread to be taken care of by cutting 
apparatus. Unfortunatel}', this thread does not lie in the path 
of the regular thread-cutter, requiring an extra cutting device 
to operate at the proper time. Such a device is attached to the 
shuttle position detector, w^hich reaches forward to determine 
the position of the shuttle in the box, as the position detector 
passes into the path of the thread referred to. This additional 
cutter not only severs the thread at this point, but also holds 
the severed portion taut until the regular thread-cutter severs it 
again near the selvage of the cloth. While somewhat difficult 
to describe, the operation is' perfectly simple and efficient. 

The Feeler is practically necessary on certain classes of 
goods, yet objection has been raised on account of the waste yarn 
left on the bobbins. We have endea^'ored to reduce this to 
small limits by continual perfection of the feeler mechanism 
itself. We also limit the amount of waste by applying attach- 
ments to the spinning frames which spin the filling yarn, called 
"Bunch Builders," which govern the traverse motion so as to 
^vind a slight preliminary bunch on the bobbins near the lower 
end of the traverse, so that the feeler will not operate until the 
bunch itself begins to be reduced in volume. We have patterns 
of these mechanisms to fit all the American makes of spinning 
frame. Another objection to the feeler has been raised on 
account of the extra labor necessary in remoA'ing the waste 
yarn from the bobbins, especially as the bobbins have some- 
times been damaged by the use of kni^'es for this purpose. 
We are now building little machines, in which a large, rough- 
surfaced roller, by rapid revolution, will easily wind off the 
waste yarn of several bobbins at a time, reducing the expense 
as com^^ared with the former process, and causing no damage at 
all to the bobbins. Most of the waste yarn is easily pulled off 
bv the finsfers. 



73 



r\ ^ 




a:} 

H 
en 



^ O 

<° 

X o 

w 
w 



TO T EMPLE 

THREAD CUTTER 




I— I P 



o 






74 



THE DOUBLE FORK. 

The cloth which -we intend to weave on our looms may be 
roughly divided into three classes. First, including goods on 
which mispicks are not important and on which slight thick and 
thin places are of little moment. These ai'e produced by the 
ordinary plain loom of commerce which our regular Northrop 
loom is replacing. 

The second class includes the grades on which mispicks are 
considered important, and for which w^e apply the feeler device. 

The third class includes all the goods on which mispicks are 
not important, but on which thick and thin places are not 
desired. This grade can be woven on our new double-fork 
looms and we expect to find all grades iniproved by use of this 
new idea. 

There is a prevailing notion to the effect that print cloth 
may have all sorts of faults, because the dyes disguise them. 
Anyone who looks at the cloth running over the blackboard in 
the cloth room of any print mill, will notice defects in every 
single cut of cloth woven, there being full as many with cloth 
woven on the common loom as with the cloth woven on the 
Northrop loom. The buvers have grown accustomed to these 
faults. When it is understood, however, that cuts of print cloth, 
or any other cloth, can be woven entire, without a thick or a 
thin place, the trade will undoubtedly demand improvement. 

The Double Fork system, has already worked with 
great success on thousands of looms, and has recently been 
improved and simplified in detail. It detects the absence of fill- 
ing on either side of the loom, and prevents the take-up from 
moving if filling is not present. With two forks, absence of 
filling is detected more promptly, and they also take care of any 
trouble caused by a dragging end of filling, which sometimes 



IS 



holds the fork up at the left side of the loom, if the yarn is 
coarse. The double fork is therefore applicable to coarse 
weaving, as well as very fine goods, having special advantages 
in each application. It is also added to Feeler looms as an 
additional precaution. 

The Filling-Fork, whether single or double, is the most 
important element of the loom, to our mind. It is liable to false 
operation if the tines get bent, or if the lay gets out of position, 
or loose in its bearings. We are now making a fork in which 
the tines are cast in place in a solid block, and_ are also bringing 
out impi'ovements in loom construction intended to prevent the 
possibility of variation in the position of the lay itself. 



STANDARD MODBLS OF LOOM CON- 
STRUCTION. 

Having considered the different new attachments which are 
peculiarly adapted to automatic weaving, we next show cuts of 
looms complete with the devices in their relative co-operation 
with the standard loom organisms where their detail may be still 
further elaborated. Although many loom manufacturers have 
built from one standard set of patterns for years at a time, we 
have brought out ten different models, with full sets of patterns 
for each, within a period of ten years. These different models 
are not only necessary by reason of variety in width and weight 
of cloth woven, but also represent improvements in design of 
sufficient importance to warrant new construction throughout. 




A MODEL (also called 1894 pattern). 

Not now built. This was the loom sent out on the Qiieen 
City, Tucapau, and other early orders. We built this model in 
rights and lefts, not having then adopted our one-hand loom 
construction. 



77 




END VIEW OF A MODEL LOOM. 
Steel Harness, Saw-tooth Gearing, Shepard Let-off, Mason 
Take-up, Movable Bobbin-chute and other details as originally 
presented. 



"The cloth is as near perfect as can be. Weavers run, or attend, 
from 16 to 28 Northrop looms, and do not work any harder than I have 
seen them do on eight common looms, and pretty near all the weavers 
here are what wouktbe called new weavers ; that is, having only from 
two to three years' experience; and, in fact, the majority of them 
learned here." — [Contributor to Wade's Fibre and Fabric. 



78 




B MODEL (ALSO CALLED 1895 loom) . 

Not now built. This pattern was continually improved and 
was our standard for prints and other light goods until 1898. It 
had a wider frame than the A model, longer shuttle boxes, new 
take-up, Stearns rocker and One Hand construction. 



C MODEL (also called 1896 loom). 

Not now built. This w^as our first heavy pattern loom. It 
M'as of the One Hand construction with heavy design throughout. 
(No cut of this to show.) 



79 




J 



D MODEL, HEAVY STANDARD, NO. 1 HOPPER. 

Cut shows dobby head applied. The take-up on this special 
style of D loom is of the worm gear variety. 



"Constant pro^-ress has been the watchword of the last quarter of a 
century, and will lead in the next, so near at hand. Mr. Draper puts 
the Northrop loom, the latest production of his model shop, into your 
mill today and starts it with amazing success, but while this pattern, 
the product of many years of hard work of the inventor, with the 
added talents of many mechanics, has been in course of construction, a 
new and better way has been devised to accomplish desired results or to 
overcome some slight defect obvious in your lot of looms. And you are 
told that in the next lot of looms built these defects will be remedied, 
and too late you regret that you had not waited before giving your 
order. 

The difficulty, however, is inevitable. Evolution is constant in 
everything to which the mind devotes itself earnestly, honestly, and 
persistently — and each lot of looms tui-ned out will naturally be superi- 
or in some respect to that which preceded it.'' — [_P)'est. Frederick E. 
Clarke at Montreal meeting of the N. E. Cot. A/an. Asso., Oct. 5, 1899. 



8o 




CROSS SECTION OF D MODEL LOOM. 

No. I hopper, five harness, cotton-harness, Roper warp-stop. 



"The ISTorthrop looms at this mill are running on 60s warp and 70s 
to 80s filling. I have never seen looms run any better, on coarse nmii- 
bers even, than these are running ; in fact I do not see how any looms 
could do better. The weavers run 16 looms each and did not seem to 
have anything to do. The overseer called my attention to his loom fix- 
ers on these looms sitting down by their bench sleeping, which he said 
was no unusual sight. He says he gets all of 95 per cent, product." — 
[Extract from Expert's Report^ June 20, 1903. 



Si 




D MODEL LOOM WITH DOBBY. 

We have sold hundreds of looms for dobby weaves which 
are giving the best of satisfaction. 



83 




P^ORTY INCH E MODEL LOOM, 
No. 1 Hopper, Steel Harness, original High-roll Cut Motion. 



"lu couversatiou with one of our most i^romiuent manufacturers 
this weelv, who has just returned from a trip througli the South, he 
informed us that he took especial pains to visit a mill making print 
cloths, where it had all Northrop looms, and that he never saw nicer 
woven goods, and made at a cost Avhich we are not at liberty to state, 
but it was verj'^ low indeed.'"- — [^Boston Journal of Commerce. 




Oh 

a. 
o 



o 
2; 



o 
o 



< 



w 

Q 
O 

w 
o 



I— I 

> 

Oh 

o 



84 




E MODEL. 

Regular pattern for prints and sheetings up to 1904. Cut 
sho"ws a steel hai-ness bobbin filling loom as made in 1898 and 
1899. Improvements have been added continuously, as will be 
shown in other cuts to follow. 



"I called at the 



Mills; found the looms riinuing very well. 



They have reduced the seconds on their plain work to 1 ^o pei- cent; and 
on their sateens to one-half of one per cent. This is perfectly satisfac- 
tory to them."' — [Salesman's Report^ Oct. 24, 190:^. 



Sq 




E MODEL LOOM WITH FEELER. 

NO. I HOPPKR. 

The deep can is used to enable the dropping bobbin to drag 
out the length of filling cut by the extra thread cutter. 

While the cut shows the feeler on a two-harness loom, it is 
more customary to use this device on multiple harness weaving. 
The feeler shown is one of the earlier constructions. 



"We looked at the Draper looms, which are runuiug extremely 
Avell, with weavers runniug 16 looms each on 4-shade cotton flannel, 17s 
warp and 9s filliuo-. They ai-e doing very well with the feelers and 
were making little waste." — [Salesman's Beport of Nov. 28, 1903. 



86 




CROSS-SECTION OF E MODEL STEEL HARNESS 
LOOM, NO. 1 HOPPER. 

(Shuttle positioning device is different from that in perspec- 
tive view of E model, and hopper is lor cops instead of bobbin. 
Pulleys are at the left hand on this loom.) 

This cut gives a good detail of the cloth winding device on 
our high roll take-up. Also shows hand adjustment of harness 
jacks. 

The detail of the warp-stopping connection cannot be shown 
in this cut, as the devices used are not on the half of the loom 
which appears in the cut. 



87 




E MODEL WITH LARGE HOPPER. 

This is the regular standard type for general weaving used 
from 1S9S to 1904 (still in use). It began to receive the large 
hopper as per cut in 1901. More looms have been sold ol this 
model than an}^ other that we have put out. 



"In New England to-day the price of weaving on the ordinary 
looms, with the last ten per cent, that has just been given, is nineteen 
and eight-tenths cents— say twenty cents— per cut, that is, tor titty 
yards A new loom has been invented by which the weaver can mind 
about twice as many, and therefore the price per cut is reduced about 
one-half. These are what are called the Draper looms. . . . .in 
the South they have hardly any other kind of looms; they have the 

best. I saw one woman minding twenty-four looms ine 

price thev pay for fifty yards in South Carolina is six and one-quarter 
cents. The operatives of course, even at this rate, are earning more 
than they ever earned before." .... George Gunton, 



88 



F MODEL. 

Extra heavy pattern for goods 73 inches and wider. Made 
with compensating let-off for two beams, triple cranks, com- 
pound spring cloth winder, friction pulley drive. 

G MODEL. 
Special frame. D Model weight with E Model depth. We 
liave no cuts to show these two latter stvles. 




H MODEL, HEAVY SIDE CAM LOOM, 8 HARNESS. 
Frame same as D and E Models. 



I MODEL, not ready for illustration. This will be of a 
construction somewhat simihir to our present E Model and 
adapted for the same class of weaving. 



89 




J MODEL LOOM FOR PRINT CLOTH AND LIGHT 

WEAVES. 

There are more looms weaving plain two harness goods, on 
print cloth style than on an}^ other single grade of cloth. Mills 
can equip for this standard product and run continuously for 
years without necessity for changes. We started originally "with 
a loom for weaving these goods, but in designing foresaw other 
uses and therefore prepared the frame and other parts for them 
as well. A year or so ago we made up our minds that there 
was a sufficient field in light narrow wea\'ing to warrant the 
building of a special loom primarih" adapted for this use. We 
have thus developed a model that takes up no more floor space 
than is necessary, that is no heavier than is necessary, and in 
which the moving parts are not clumsy and power absorbing. 
The fatigue of running and handling such a loom must be greatly 



90 



reduced. We utilize new inventions to reduce shock, jar, 
smashes, etc., and in view of the light goods to be woven, pro- 
tect against the slightest crack or thin place by novel mechanisms. 
Several of these will be particularly referred to in the special 
articles on take-up, double fork, anti-bang, etc. These various 
motions have shown so much advantage that we do not intend to 
limit their adoption to the J Model loom alone. There are 
several thousand of these looms already running and several 
thousand more on order. They have proved a great success, 
especially when fitted with the complete range of devices which 
we recommend for them. They will run at high speed if neces- 
sary, and with lighter power. Thev can be made with either 
front or back binders and with either steel or cotton harness, 
though we recommend the steel harness unreservedly for this 
class of work. 



OUR COMMON LOOM. 

We have at times filled several orders for common looms 
for parties who were not fully decided as to whether our mech- 
anisms were applicable to their special kind of goods, with the 
idea that when we should have the necessai-y devices they could 
be attached to the looms. At the present time, however, our 
range of weaving is so broad that we rarely find a case where 
the common loom could be advised, and we foresee little future 
chance for their introduction. 

Ovv'ing to our expensive experimenting and disregard for 
cost, we probably make the best common loom now in the 
market. Our common loom is simply our Northrop loom with 
the hopper and warp stop-motion left off and a slight change at 
the fork. With our make of loom it is, of course, guaranteed 




OUR COMMON LOOM. 

The cut shows the common loom of the B model type, of 
which we have sold several lots to purchasers who bought to 
equip with Northrop devices later. We have not encouraged 
the sale of plain looms as our force has been busy with North- 
rop Loom orders. It seems strange, however, that those who 
continue to buy common looms do not universally demand a type 
that will be guaranteed to receive futui'e improvements readily. 



92 



that our devices can be easily applied, while this is not always 
true of looms made by other builders. 

We have given fully as much attention in late years to per- 
fecting the conventional loom parts as we have to the betterment 
of our own additional devices. The common loom which we 
should furnish would, therefore, have all of our latest improve- 
ments in the line of let-off, take-up, etc. 



It is, of course, understood that the cuts which we show^ do 
not pretend to illustrate all of our .loom products. Each model 
that we build is made in many w^idths, and modifications 
ai"e often necessary. At present, our range in width is from 
looms for 28-inch goods, which will, of course, weave narrower, 
up to looms for cloth 108 inches wide. We call any loom a wide 
loom which requires additional parts, such as centre swords, 
double beam, etc. We have found it advisable on these wide 
looms to use front binders, and a simple rocker motion that will 
give the shuttle a smooth, straight pick. 

Some classes of looms require clutch pulleys, which w^e can 
supply when ordered, but we do not recommend thera for 
universal application. 



While we prefer to sell complete looms, we can apply our 
devices to certain models of old looms of others' manufacture. 
Such changing over is especially advisable where the common 
loom is too valuable to be discarded, as in the case of broad 
looms, dobby looms, etc. We have changed over several thou- 
sand common looms with good results and have a special depart- 
ment for that work. 



93 



LOOM CONSTRUCTION. 

Soon after the introduction of our first looms, which were 
made in rights and lefts, we found that the shuttle used with one 
type of loom threaded up better than the shuttle on the other, the 
eyes being entirely different in threading detail. This led to the 
idea of making looms all one hand, and as this change only 
necessitated invention in the line of shipping mechanism, we 
promptly adopted the idea, and have built all our looms in this 
way ever since. It is, of course, a great convenience to us, as 
builders, to have all of our looms made from the same patterns, 
and it must be an even greater advantage to the mills, for not 
only is their supply of repair parts lessened, but the weavers 
find it much easier to go through a set of one hand movements, 
rather than learn to do many operations with either hand. 

It seems strange that the original error of complicating 
parts and detail by right and left construction was prolonged 
for a full century. It is, of course, still necessary to have 
the pulleys arranged to belt at either side of the loom, and we 
find it also more convenient to have our let-offs changeable 
in position ; but the shipper handle is always at the left, and 
the hopper always at the right, on all looms which we have 
built with the exception of the A model. When we change 
over looms of other makes, we supply parts for both right and 
left hand looms, as no other builder has followed our lead, 
especially as the system we use is protected by several patents. 
It is well known that with the ordinary type of loom, as built, 
one hand will run better than the other, as patterns of one hand 
are not precise opposites to the other, and are necessarily better 
or worse in adaptation. This gives two differently operating 
constructions to bother the fixer. 



94 



LET- OFF. 

Although the Bartlett was our own original let-off, and 
although we did use it on thousands of our Northrop looms in 
an improved form, we have now replaced it by a greatly 
superior mechanism known as the "Draper-Roper," v^hich is 
self-adjusting and thoroughl}- efficient for nearly all the possible 
requirements. 

We made a curious mechanical error on these motions as 
first sent out, which tended to give them a bad name, but on 
discovery of the fault it was promptly remedied by sending 
correct parts to every mill where the let-offs wei'e in use, and we 
now hear nothing but praise for their performances. 

Like the Bartlett Let-off, the Draper-Roper is actuated 
from the motion of the lay and governed by the tension of the 
yarn at the whip-roll. It is, however, additionally controlled by 
the variation in the diameter of the warp beam, as the warp is 
woven off, by a follower, pressing against the beam, which by 
its change in angle determines the limits of motion by which the 
actuating parts operate. With ordinary let-offs, the cloth woven 
varies remarkably in width from full to empty beam, whereas 
with the Draper-Roper this variation is practically eliminated, so 
far as influence of the let-off itself is concerned. There are 
other causes which affect the width, and their results should not 
be confused with the let-off action. A recent test of actual ten- 
sion at the whip roll during the entire time a beam was weaving 
off showed that the variation was confined between 33 1-3 and 
32 povuids — certainly a remarkable uniformity for this class of 
mechanism. 



"Their Northrop looms were all riiuniug very av ell ; the weavers 
run IS prints each, and on the wider looms 16 each; the fixers run 115 
looms each." — IE xtr act from Expert's Beport, Jan. 2, 1904. 




BARTLETT LET-OFF. 



The Bartlett was our standard until the Draper- Roper let- 
off appeared. We owned the original Snell and Bartlett patent 
and sold over 50,000 of them lor use on old and new looms 
hefore 1S70. 



96 




DRAPER-ROPER LET-OFF AND ANTI-BANG. 

The cut shows this let-off applied to a J model loom. 
Note the follower which bears against the warp on the beam. 
The operative parts are largely hidden from view. 

Note in the cut of the let-off another new idea which we 
call the anti-bang. The frog slide connects to the whip roll so 
as to release the warp in case the loom bangs off. This relieves 
the loom itself from shock and also prevents smashes. We 
believe this idea will greatly lessen loom repairs and the 
loosening of nuts and screws. 



97 



SHEDDING MECHANISM. 

Our standard forms of shedding mechanism at present 
include the ordinary single roll with strapping at top and cam 
treadle drive at bottom, for two harness work, with either steel 
•or cotton harness, the Lacey Top Rig for multiple cotton har- 
ness, and a spring compensating motion for the top rigging of 
our multiple steel harness mechanism. We are, however, ex- 
perimenting with new motions for our steel harness looms, and 
shall soon introduce a complete novelty in the line of shedding 
mechanism, doing away with all treadles, cams, and jacks under 
the warp, giving more space for the ^varp beam and bringing 
all of the operating parts out where they are easily observed and 
adjusted. We shall have more to say publicly about this device 
when our patents are issued and a further trial made. 

The Lacey device is simple and durable for cotton harness 
use, and it is always in place to hang a warp, does not wear out 
straps so fast as the ordinary motion, and is easily adjusted. It 
is quite similar to the Wyman motion used on Crompton & 
Knowles looms, but we think it contains important additional 
improvements ; in fact, other loom builders have wished at times 
to have the privilege of using our motion on their own makes of 
loom . 

We are ready to equip looms with side cams for special 
weaves, or dobbies, when desired. We have built hundreds of 
side cam looms for cordvu-oy and thousands of dobby looms for 
various weaves. 



"One man who came under my personal observation was working 
27 looms. He was producing a print cloth, 28 inches wide, 60x64 ends 
per inch, 29's warp and 37"s"weft. The avei-age for the whole mill was 
about 19 looms per weaver. Is it possible for our manufacturers to 
compete with this?'' — [English expert's report on visit to America^ from 
English paper ^ October^ 1902. 



98 




DETAIL OF LACEY TOP-RIG ON D MODEL. 

Our steel harness is becoming so universal that we have 
less field for this motion than formerly. Cut also shows our 
worm gear take-up with the let-back modification. 



99 



TAKE-UP AND CUT-MOTION. 

Although it might have been simpler to stick to standard 
designs in this line, copying from well known mechanisms, we 
have, as a matter of fact, given as much time to the Take-Up ol 
the loom as any other separate feature. We started with a 
conventional pattern, but on finding that many of our customers 
desired to weave large rolls of cloth, we tried to design an 
arrangement which would w^ind any size roll desired up to i8 
inches in diameter. We saw that the High-Roll arrangement of 
cut-motion seemed to offer marked advantages in this line, 
although the High-Roll had never gone into noticeable use in 
this country and was open to many objections in the forms com- 
monly known abroad. Mr. Northrop devised our present stand- 
ard construction with the exception of quite recent changes, 
and the majority of our looms now in use are equipped with the 
High-Roll pattern. 

In its best known form, the cloth passes directly to the 
rough-surfaced roll and is wound around a core, or bar, which 
is pressed up against the roll by two supports operating from a 
coiled spring which governs a double gear and rack device. 
The spring is wound up by the action of the racks as the roll 
winds, and the cloth is removed by releasing the spring with a 
hand crank. There are marked advantages in this arrangement, 
as the cloth will not shrink or wrinkle and the width of the 
goods will be more uniform and the picks more even. The 
breast beam comes outside the cloth, protecting it from blemish 
when the weaver leans over the loom. The direct acting roll 
also helps take strain off the temples and lessens warp 
breakage. 

On all our cut-motions we use a metal cloth roll, to which 

L.oCC. 



the filleting is applied, unless the goods woven demand some 
special surface only applicable to a wooden roll. This will not 
shrink or swell like a wooden roll, thereby keeping the picks per 
inch uniform and the yards per pound at a proper standard. 
We believe the mill that runs wooden rollers will make its cloth 
either too light or too heavy. If too heavy, the mill is giving 
away value without remuneration, and if too light, there will 
be dissatisfaction at the buying end. 

Qiiite recently we have made an improvement by which the 
core or bar in the cloth roll is positively started by having 
geared teeth engage with gears on the large winding roll when 
first starting to wind. As the cloth gets larger in diameter on 
the roll the gear teeth move apart and unlock. 

While the mechanisms just described are parts of the 
cut-motion, they are operated directly by the take-up devices 
proper which transmit movement from the lay or cam-shaft or 
other moving parts of the loom. We have quite a variety of 
mechanisms for various classes of looms, many of which we 
have not shown separately, and some of which ha^■e been consid- 
erably modified since the cuts were made. It is practically im- 
possible to keep our cuts up to date in view of the rapidity of 
improvement in the devices themselves. 



"There has been expended in experiments, in investigation and for 
patents, some $300,000. The result is a reduction of one-half in the 
cost of weaving cotton clotli. Tlie cost of weaving constitutes one-half 
the cost of labor required to produce cotton clotli. Consequently the 
saving secured by the loom is approximately one-quarter of the labor of 
producing the cloth. Experts have estimated that in 1895, $80,000,000 
was paid for labor in the cotton manufacture in the United States. 
Assume that the improved loom had been thoroughly introduced, the 
saving secured thereby would have been approximately $20,000,000. 
The interest on the national debt of the United States in 1892, the last 
year of Republican control, was $22,893,000. The possible saving of 
the new loom, therefore, would be about seven-eighths of this interest." 
— IHon. Charles Warren Lippitt, ex-Governor of Rhode Island. 



lOI 




B MODEL LOOM TAKE-UP. 

This take-up derives its inotion from the rocking of the 
lay-sword. It has a let-back governed from the fork-slide. Cut 
also illustrates the weft-hammer and shipper knock-off. 




J MODEL TAKE-UP. 

This take-up is extremely simple, as will be seen by the 
cut. It is operated by a cam on the lower loom shaft and so 
timed that it will not take up unless the shuttle is picked. This 
pi'events the thin places which are sometimes formed on common 
and old Northrop looms if the weaver turns the loom over by 
hand while mending warp or before starting the shipper. The 
ratchet shaft operates through a worm to the take-up roll — no 
chance for back lash of gears. A is the upright connecting to 
the left-hand fork and B the lever connecting to the arresting 
device. 



I03 




SECTION OF B MODEL LOOM CUT-MOTION WITH 
FULL TEN-INCH ROLL OF CLOTH. 

This cut is interesting in comparison with our later motion, 
which has many additional advantages. The fliter or reed- 
holder shown is not now used. 



I04 




ORIGINAL HIGH ROLL CUT-MOTION FOR E 
MODEL LOOM. 

The cut illustrates our earliest pattern of High Roll cut- 
motion. It was quickly superseded by the next type shown. 



I05 




DETAIL OF THE CLOTH WINDING DEVICE OR 
CUT-MOTION ON OUR HIGH-ROLL TAKE-UP. 

This is the cut-motion which has been an integral part of the 
greater numl)er of Northrop Looms sold. It has been univer- 
sally satisfactory on the average line of goods. Certain cloth, 
however, requires greater chance to yield between the fell and 
the take-up roll, and we have therefore made a new construc- 
tion shown on the following page, which allows various changes 
in wind. 



io6 




OUR LATEST ARRANGEMENT OF CUT MOTION. 



As will be noted in the cross-section of a Northrop loom, 
as shown in the cut, we have recently made a material modifica- 
tion in our Cut Motion, in order to cover various requirements 
of weaving, it being found necessary in certain instances to have 
a greater length of cloth from the reed to the take-up roll than 
our former high-roll arrangement allowed. 



io7 



This arrangement allows four different systems of controll- 
ing the cloth between the reed and the roll. The purchaser of 
the loom can therefore suit himself as to the method employed 
and adapt the method to the goods. The take-up roll is given a 
wide range of vertical adjustment to allow for lessening the 
strain on either the top or bottom shade, as desired. 

The large cut shows a cross-section of the loom without the 
hopper, in order to emphasize the main feature of the new parts 
and the three lower cuts show the alternate methods of use. 



BRAKM MECHANISM. 

We employ a simple and convenient filling-brake of our 
own design, which is actuated whenever the shipper is released. 
We formerly put these brakes on every loom we made, no 
matter what the style of weaving. Finding, however, after con- 
siderable experience, that the action of any braking device is bad 
for the loom in general, we prefer now to apply brakes only to 
the special weaves where they seem peculiarly necessary. 

The illustration on the next page shows the brake attached 
to the frog in usual manner, also an independent brake actuator 
liberated by the shipper handle. A is a rod leading across the 
loom to operate the belt shipper on the other side of the loom. 
B shows a detail of the filling-brake lock which is liberated by 
the weaver before moving the lay by hand. 

It would be found by close examination, that the filling- 
brakes on the ordinary looms used in the ordinary mills, are not 
continuously operative ; in fact, it is probable that the great 
majority do not act as they should. Our own brake has the 
advantage of a positive screw adjustment by which it may be 



loS 



kept easily adjusted ; but it increases repairs of v^arious kinds 
enormously to stop looms suddenly, and there is no need of such 
quick stopping in the ordinary line of weaving. 




BRAKE MECHANISM USED ON B MODEL LOOM. 



"Some people say that the Draper loom is apt to make thiu stripes, 
but from all I can hear, thiu stripes are about as scarce as hen's teeth. 
The work runs very well, and Jesse Barton, an 18 loom weaver, says he 
ran a loom seven hours and never stopped, only for dinner hour. It is 
a common thing for looms to run four or five hours at a stretch." — 
\_From letter to Textile Excel sio?' from Wan-enville, S. C, dunng 1900. 



I09 



*' 


-- "1 


t 


i% 


111 


^^m 




A 




THE IMPROVED DURKIN THIN PLACE PREVENTER. 

We applied thousands of these attachments to the old com- 
mon looms before entering the loom field. Those who wish to 
get the best results out of their old looms when weaving light 
goods can use them to great advantage. They lessen thin and 
thick places, lessen the results of shuttle smashes, lessen warp 
breakage, and increase production. We recommend them to 
purchasers of our Northrop Looms who intend to weave light 
goods on them. Every improvement that tends to lessen the 
breakage of warp threads is of high importance when endeavor- 
ing to increase the number of looms per operative. A slight 
extra cost at the start may pay for itself many times and not 
always receive due credit for the performance. 

The construction consists of a pair of arms fastened to the 
usual bar across the loom which supports or forms the whip 
roll, and a roller held at its ends by the shding bearings, noted 
in the cut by the open hole for the journal. Where Bartlett let- 
offs are in use the regular roll may be used without necessity for 
an additional warp roller. 

In our first patterns there was difiiculty at times in adjust- 
ing the tension of the spring to allow definite control of the 
movement of the whip roll. We have now overcome this 
trouble by using uniform spring tension and governing the 
movement by adjustable stops as shown. We make patterns to 
fit different styles of looms. 



SULLIVAN'S PATENT SHUTTLE GUARD. 



These Shuttle Guards are made of 
the best quahty coppered wire, five- 
sixteenths of an inch in diameter, and 
are long enough to reach the entire 
length of the hand-rail. An eye is 
formed in each end, and these eyes fit 
over the bolts w^hich attach the hand- 
rail to the swords. No other fastening 
is required, except for certain widths 
of looms, when a center support is 
added. The guard fits closely to the 
hand-rail for about three inches at each 
end and is then bent to hang over the 
race in any position desired. 

This form of construction and at- 
tachment makes the most simple and 
durable shuttle guard that has thus far 
been introduced. 

The hand-rail is not cut or dam- 
aged in any way in making the attach- 
ment, nor are there any bolts, screws, 
or other fastening, such as have to be 
used with other guards, to work loose 
and annoy and hinder the weavers. 
There are no bolt ends projecting back 
of hand-rail to tear the harness. This 
guai'd can be applied for repairs where 
it would otherwise be necessary to re- 
new the hand-rail, at less than half the 
cost of making and fitting a new hand-rail. There are thou- 
sands of them in use. 






FIG. I. 



FIG. 2. 



THE BOLTON LOOM-SEAT. 

This novel attachment can be applied to any of our looms 
and is now sent out with all orders, one to each eight looms. It 
provides a seat for the operative that is normally held out of the 
way by a spring. 

Fig. I shows the seat as held down by the weaver's weight. 
Fig. 2 shows it returned to position under control of its spring. 

Mr. T. H. Rennie, Superintendent of the Graniteville Mfg. 
Co., wrote us he considered these seats an '•''Indispensable ad- 
junct to a well regulated tveave-room." 




THE KEENE DRAVVING-IN FRAME. 

We are introducing a clrawing-in frame with attachments, 
especially designed for holding the warp, drop wire detectors, 
harness, and reed in a new and convenient manner, to assist the 
operative in drawing in a large number of warp ends in a given 
time. There has been some objection to the use of warp-stop- 
motions in that they caused extra expense lor drawing in ; but 
this delect is largely obviated by this present invention. Its 
parts are adjustable, and have a range so that they are applicable 
to all our various forms of warp stop-motions. Price recently 
reduced one-half. 



113 



SP^ECIFICATIONS OF NORTHROP 
LOOMS 

Ordered From the Draper Company, Hopedai.e, Mass. 



Make out separate specifications for each style and size of loom. 



For Date ordered 190 

Address 

Number Size Model 

Right-Hand Belt from Above Left-Hand Belt from Above 

Right-Hand Belt from Below Lel't-Hand Belt from Below 

Kind of Cloth to be woven Width Sley 

Number of Picks per inch Number of threads in Warp 

Number of Warp Yarn Number of FilUng Yarn 

Shall Looms be duplicate of others in the Mill.? 

If so, give date of previous oi-der 

Is filling on Bobbins or Cops ? Total length of Bobbin or Cops 

Note : — It is necessary to send several sample cops with mule 
spindle, or bobbin and spindle. Our regular sizes of 
bobbins take 5 1-2 inch travei'se on a bobbin 6 3-4 
inches long; 6 i-S inches on a bobbin 7 3'8 inclies 
long ; and a 6 3-4 inch traverse on a bobbin 8 inches 
long. Our regular cop sizes are 5 1-2, 6 1-8 and 6 3-4 
traverse. Bobbins are patented, and must be ordered 
through us. At least 200 per loom should be pro- 
vided. When cops are used we send 30 skewers with 
each loom for large battery ; 20 skewers with each 
loom for small battery. These are charged extra. 



114 



Shall we make Bobbin or Cop Heads Standard Butt? 

Give largest diameter of full falling Bobbin or Cop measured on 

the Yarn 

Large or Small Battery? Diameter of Spinning Ring 

Note: — Large Battery takes 25 bobbins or cops. Small bat- 
tery takes 15 bobbins or cops. 

What style of Take-up ?... : 

Note : — Our " High Roll" construction admits of winding any 

diameter Cloth Roll up to 17 inches. Embodied 

with this we have three separate styles of Take-up. 

Our regular pattern takes up with every pick and lets 

back to prevent thin places. 
Our Worm Take-up is a positive take-up, without the 
let-back feature, and is especially designed for 
corduroys, velvets and similar fabrics, which re- 
quire 200 picks per inch and above. 
Our Worm Take-up with let-back is designed for 
those who require a positive take-up and still de- 
sire the let-back feature. 
Our Standard Take-up has i 1-4 inch up and down 
adjustment of sand roll. If more is required, 
please specify. 

What st3de of Let-off ? 

Note: — We furnish Roper, Bartlett, Friction, Roper and 
Friction, or Bartlett and Friction combined. 
On " F" Model looms we furnish Compound Let-off; 
on Cordui'oy looms w^e furnish a special Let-off. 
If Friction Let-off, shall we order Chain, Fibre, or Rope 

Friction? 

Will you have Drag Rolls? 

Note : — These are used only for veiy heavy vs^eaves ; heavy 
denims and goods of this character. 
We recommend for most cloths Plain Pipe Whip 



115 



Rolls ; for heavy weaves, not taking Drag Rolls, 
Vibrating Whip Rolls ; for very light w^eaves, 
Durkin Thick and Thin Place Preventors. Un- 
less Vibrating Whip Rolls, Thick and Thin 
Place Preventors or Di^ag Rolls are specified, we 
shall furnish with plain Pipe Roll. 

,Will you have Feeler? 

What style Warp Stop-Motion is required? 

NoTK : — We have three styles : . 

Steel harness using one steel heddle for every warp 

thread, adapted for 3-3-4 ^^^^ 5 harness work. 
Drop-wire Stop-motion for cotton harness, w^hich 
requires one drop wire for every two warp threads 
in a two-harness loom adapted for 2-3-4 '^^^ 5 
harness work. 
Single Thread or Lease-rod Stop-motion for cotton 
harness, using one drop wire for every warp 
thread. This stop-motion is adapted for any 
number of harness from 2 up. 
Drop Wires and Heddles are extras and should be 
ordered in sufficient quantities for extra drawing-in 
sets. It is well to order about 20 per cent, more 
drop wires or heddles than the looms figure for 
this purpose. 

How many Steel Heddles or Drop Wires? 

How many looms arranged for 2 Harnesses? 

How many looms arranged for 3 Harnesses? How 

many up ? How many down ? 

How many looms arranged for 4 Harnesses? How 

many up ? How many down ? 

How many looms arranged for 5 Hai'nesses ? How 

many up ? How man}^ down ? 

What style Harness Motion? 



ii6 



Note : — We furnish the regular Top Harness-motion or Side- 
top Compensating Motion. 
We adapt our looms to take either the Crompton or 

Stafford Dobby. 
We also furnish Special Side Cam Motion for Cordu- 
roys. 

Are Cams on Cam Shaft or Auxiliary Shaft? 

If Auxiliary Shaft, shall we send gears to run 3-3-4-5 shade? 

Single or Double Jack Hooks? 

On what No. of Harness shall we set up looms? How 

many up? Ho\v many down? 

Shall we supply Dobby? How many Harnesses? 

What style? 

Shall we supply Single or Double Spring Jack or Direct 

Springs? 

Is Selvage Motion required? Plain or Tape? 

What Diameter and Face of Driving Pulley? What 

width of Belt? 

Tight and Loose or Friction Pulley? 

Note : — Regular size 12 inches diameter, 2 1-4 inches face, for 
28 inch loom. 14 inches diameter, 21-4 inches 
face, for 40 inch loom. We strongly recommend 
this width of face, as wider pulleys are much 
more troublesome in shifting belts. 
For 3 1-2 inch belts and wider, we recommend fric- 
tion pulleys. 
We furnish 16 1-2 inch, 18 inch and 20 inch Beam Heads. 

Which do you require? 

Distance between Heads ? 

Note : — For proper width between Beam Heads, we recom- 
mend 4 inches more than size of loom. For 
those desiring extra space we supply Beams 5 1-2 
inches wider than the size of loom. 



117 



We furnish ^ inch and 6 inch diameter Yarn Beams. Which 

do you require ? - 

Note : — We recommend 6 inch barrel only on fine yarns. 

How many extra Shuttles.? (Only one per loom included 

without extra cost.) 

What style Temple will you have, i 3-4 or 2 1-3 Roll? 

,How many Bobbins shall we order for you.? Style 

Oil soaked ; 

For what number of picks shall we set up looms.? 

Note : — Send us several pieces of reed such as you intend using 
on these looms. One piece is not sufficient. As 
the contraction on our High Roll Take-up is con- 
siderably less on several classes of weaves than on 
other looms, it would be well to write us before 
ordering new reeds. The maximum reed space 
is =; inches wider than the size of the loom. 
Pickers must be of short pattern, not projecting above 

shuttle box. 
We furnish sample sets of strapping and pickers with- 
out extra charge. 
On Cordui-oy looms send us copy of Chain Draft. 
We will send diagrams of floor plan after questions are 
answered. 

By what lines shall we ship.? 

Remarks 



"The Northrop loom, by increasing tlie capacity of the operative 
300 per cent., has brouo-ht the manufacture of cotton up to a point that 
is considered practicallv perfect. In its most hig-hly developed form 
tliis loom now enables oiie man to do the work of a thousand men at the 
beginning of the cotton industry, working by hand."— [^rom article on 
"Evolution of the Cotton Indnstnj,'" in Gunton's Magazine for Feb., 1904. 



ii8 



xn 

O 

1— I 
m 
t5 

Q 

O 
O 

o 
w 

W 

o 


Q 

s 

o 


Proper Width 

Between 

Beam 

Heads 






fcyoi- 


OM-*'aD00OCQ-*CD00O(M-*O00OC>J^CD00 


Greatest Width 

of 

Cloth 

at Temple 






H 

CO 


c<!cocbeora(ro5!^^^^Ioirii»o»5>i3505D5ocD 


Total Length 

of Multiple 

Steel Harness 

Space 


a 

3-S 






COCOCOCOCC^'^^rtl^lCSiOlOijOiCOCOCD^^ 


Total Length ■ 

of 

Cotton Harness 

Space 




S?§?SS^'^^^ggSSS8§SSSgE2 


n 




Length of Lay 

for 

15% Shuttle 

8 Bobbin 




i-f\ r-i\ rt\ r-N. H\ H\ r-t\ H\ H\ r4\ H\ H\ M\ H\ iH\ H\ t-4\ i-H\ r-l\ i-K 




\W \M \N \M \M \N ^^ \W \N \W \C-1 \M \N --^N \W \N \C^ \N --.N ^sN 
r-l\ r^--, H\ r-t\ r4\ H\ H\ H\ H\ H\ H\ H\ h\ T-i\ rt\ r4\ H\ H\ H'. h\ 

t-i-ooooooGOoooiOiOsoia:>ooooo^i-ii-i 


Length of Lay 

for 

15% Shuttle 

1% Bobbin 


1- 


t-a5r-ico>ot-a3r-<m»ot-03T-imioi-05>-i(X)>o 

t-t-0000000000050505C5aiOOOOgj^T-lj^ 


no 


V* \^ \-* \* X-* Vf Vf V)< "v* \!)< \* \* Vf \^ V* V* X"* N^ \+ \* 

r-N, r-^^ r-K r-i\ W\ HN H''. hN H^ , H\ r4^. r-C . H^ H\ H' . h\ H\ r-i\ h\ H\ 

ict'OiT— icoiot-osT-Hcciot-osT-Hcraiot-OiT— 100 

t-t-l-OOOOOOOOOOOCBroClOiOOOOOr-li^ 


Length of Lay 

for 

143^ Shuttle 

%% Bobbin 


3-S 

0'° 


?:t-oooooooooocsaiC5Cno300oooT--i^r-j 




ggg§ggSgg88§SgSS|38S2S 




5 


^i§SSSSgS5^^^^SSSgggSS 



'6 

<v 

.2 

a 
o 
a 

1 

O 

;^ 
ft 

o 

o 

h-l 

s 

K 

Ph 
O 

;^ 


Q 

s 
5 

o 


Proper Width 

Between 

Beam 

Heads 


0) 


gg^ggggs 


^ j:j3 X XX 

o o u o o o 

c cc c ce 


-1 
•1^ 


gg^gessss 


Greatest Width 
of 
Cloth 
at Temple 


I) 

2 ° 


gsgg&gssss 


CO 


g S g2 S2 E:-g S3 S3 


Total Length 

of Multiple 

Steel Harness 

■Space 


1^ 


gSgggSSS 


Note.— Depth of Looms 18-Inch Yarn Beam to 18-Inch Cloth Roll— D Mode 
Depth of Looms 18-Iiich Yarn Beam to 18-Inch Cloth Roll— Modified D Mode 
Depth of Looms 18-Inch Yarn Beam to 18-Inch Cloth Roll— H Mode 
Depth of Looms IS-Inch Yarn Beam to IS-Inch Cloth Roll— E Model 
Depth of Looms 18-Inch Yarn Beam to ISlnch Cloth Roll— K Mode 
Depth of Looms 20-Inch Yarn Beam to 18-Inch Cloth Roll— D Mode 
Depth of Looms 20-Inch Yarn Beam to 18-Inch Cloth Roll— Modified D Mode 
Depth of Looms 20-Inch Yarn Beam to 18-lnch Cloth Roll— H Mode 
Depth of Looms 20-Inch Yarn Beam to 18-Inch Cloth Roll— E Mode 
Depth of Looms 20-Inch Yarn Beam to 18-Inch Cloth Roll— K Mode 
For proper width between Beam Heads we recommend 4 inches more than size 
For those desiring extra width, -we supply Beams 5y inches wider than size of 


^*0 


t^t-t-t-t-oooooo 


Total Length 

of 

Cotton Harness 

Space 


¥ 


l-t-t-0000000000 




Ci^COOOOCQ-*CD 
L- C- L-- C- 00 00 OO 00 


Length of Lay 

for 

15% Shuttle 

8 Bobbin 


2 o 




c o 


r-N H\ r-t\ r4\ r-4\ rH\ t-K H\ 
CDOOO(M^tOOOO 


Length of I^av 

for 

mVa Shuttle 

7% Bobbin 


a 


\* \T)i -v^ \* Nth \T|i \t)i \* 

r-l\ r-l ■. r-l\ H^' HN .-^^ r^N r-t\ 


.5'° 


\* \^ \* V \* N:* \^ \^ 


Length of Lay 

for 

Uy Shuttle 

6% Bobbin 


1^ 


2S||^g§§ 


c o 


^SDOOOCQ'^OOO 




C0000«-*50000 
CO CC t- t- t- L- L- 00 



I30 





n> <U 














o"° 














^^'li 














.2o4i 














Q -^ 


t.~t-l-t-OOOOOOOOOOG5asa5050300000r-l,-l,-l 












" c 












^ OJ p 














o i> 5 


























J- q3pq 














&.H 














J3 




























"O j; 








g 






^•5 D. 










q 






cn^coiai.-05'-ia3iot-Oii-ieQir5t-c6THcomt-a5TH 






uj 






I^H 


■S)t-i.-l-I.-L-0000000000O05C5C505OOOOO^ 
















t4- 

o 






rt o -M 












cj a 








4) 
















(U 




O 








c 

CS 




















^' 












2 


>o 















i:^ 












p 


"o 




O M 








w 


P^ 


















J W (U 








5i 


J2 


^ 


— c a 


COlOl^Ci^HCOlOt^OiT— ICOUOt'CS^HCClCl-O^^COlO 






"o 


o 


o 
o 


•3 j: D. 


L-l-i.-t-000000000005050305050odoo^rHrH 






c 










o 


O 












13 


c 


hJ 










C3 


I- 


H 










o 













>^ 


o 


o 










T3 


"•^ 


\ 








o 


3 




fe 








c 


^ 


P5 




,- "c 




w 




r- 




•5 ^^o 

S^ 5 


\^<\^;^j^^V\jf\*W^\^N^N^N^N*N*N^N^\I^X^N^N^ 






ci 
V 


5 




cvi -^^o do o'c^i'-tH cobQO?^^^:obooc^^ o'bo o cvj ^ 


o" 




OJl*- ^ 






s 






J O X 

M 




t- 


s 






















M 


0) 


o" 










c 














o 


<*- 
o 


c 














o 


.£> 


c o 








t- 


OJ 


<U 


(i d, 




5 >ps 
fear's 


OCVJ-4<CDOOOG^^COOOO(M-*CDGOQOJ^COOOOCvi 


s 


4; 
S 


c 


i 1 

o g 




ct 






"" t+- a; 




15 


'O 


Hi pq 




^ OK 











M 


« 


tl 


o o 








ly 


11 


OJ 


J3 £ 








S) 


bX) 


he 
















Q, (0 








ca 


ci 


5 


o m 








H-l 


1-1 


J 


Q ;:3 




p 


^ 


. 1 

o 












C000OW*O00O(M^50lX)OCQ'*C300QM^O00 


;z: 










•- O o 


Orat-t-t-t-t-OOCOOOOOOOCSOiOSOiGSOOOOO 












^ .J 

















iper 
dth 
veen 
Heads. 


















« 'H o 










CO CO CO 








1^ 5 










P5 










^ r- — 










w^ -^ +J & 










_?J" o c 










Gi-eal 
Wid 
of CI 

tTei 


^ CO U3 








CO CO CO 


































m 










5 o « 












g^ S 8 


1— ( 














*Jt<-. JJ 








J^ 


c c S 








K 






— 




O 






o 




S 


■c s 




Pi 


§ 


s 


bi) c 




^ 


o 


5 rt n 




o 


o 

h-5 


5 
t3 




JS 8 §8 


J3 


»-) 


o 

3 


o ii 




c 


M 




^ 5 




GO 


^ 


Q 






o 


Iz 






o 






n 


«) 






g 


1 

1-5 


iz; 


th of L 
for 

Shiittl 
Bobbin 


\C^ '...C^ '.(N 
T-C. r-l-. 1-1 , 

££ § gg 


5 

a 

m 

c 










;2 

u 
















^ 




00 
















S S.C 




n 






^ Jl 


\-* v '^* 


>s 










E 
p 






!?- OS i 
t- t- 00 










E 






1-3 
















1-1 






>. 




u_ 










o 






CO 00 o 


J5 

oT 






i- t- 00 











1 






ID tH*^ 




(d 






A 




s 

^ 










«<„E 










^^ S 


00 o c^i 










Si CO CO 





INSTRUCTIONS FOR RUNNING 
NORTHROP LOOMS. 

The experience of the last nine years is by no means suffi- 
cient to absolutely settle all points of discussion. We learn 
more about the art of weaving every week, and consider the 
possibilities of further knowledge and improvement practically 
exhaustless. Many volumes have already been written about 
the detail of plain weaving with common looms, so we shall try 
to'stick more closely to the new features introduced by the novel 
mechanisms on our own looms. 

While these new devices necessarily introduce new prob- 
lems, there is nothing very intricate about their operation. 
The fact that thousands have been running for years should give 
the Fixers self confidence. 



HOPPER (OR BATTERY) ADJUST- 
MENT. 

In setting the Hopper^ first see that the filling-fork passes 
freely through the grate. Then place the filling-motion finger 
against the filling-fork slide., and the lever on the starting rod at 
the hopper side of the loom, to which the starting rod spring is 
connected, can then be set so as to cause the shuttle position 
detector to clear the shuttle when the lay is at its extreme forward 
position. Then turn the loom and allow the filling fork to 
engage with the filling-motion hook., which will cause the starting 
rod to turn, and bring the shuttle position detector across the 



123 



mouth of the shuttle box. The end of the shuttle position detec- 
tor should come very close to the back box plate^ when the lay is 
all the way forward. 

The position of the detector should be 3 15-16 inches from 
the hopper surface against which the butt of the bobbin is 
pressed to the inner face of the detector. To see if the detector 
works properly, pull the shuttle far enough out of the box so 
that it will strike it. This should cause the latch-finger on the 
hopper to clear the bunter as the lay comes forward and the 
detector contacts with the tip of the shuttle. To see if the 
transferrer acts properly, bring the lay forward with the shuttle 
in proper position, until the bunter contacts with the latch-finger, 
and as the transferrer inserts the fresh bobbin, or cop, note how 
far it is pressed into the shuttle. Should it go too far down 
and push the bobbin by the shuttle spring centre, the 
latch-finger must be set further back by means of the adjusting 
screw at the rear. Should the bobbin, or cop, not go down far 
enough into the spring to be firmly held, the latch-finger 
must be set nearer the bunter. In setting the transferrer, 
it should be regulated so that it will contact very lightly 
with the bobbin, or cop, which has been placed in the shuttle 
when the transferrer is at the end of the downward stroke. 
The wrought iron end of the transferrer, called the trans- 
fei-rer-fork^ which helps to pi-ess the bobbin, or cop, into the 
shuttle, should be directly over the centre of the shuttle 
opening, and if out of position, should be bent into place. 

When the shuttle position detector is in proper position and 
clears the shuttle tip, and the latch finger contacts properly with 
the bunter, bring the lay slowly forward by hand, and see that the 
transferrer places the bobbin, or cop, exactly in the centre of the 
shuttle. If the shuttle should come too far forward or too far 
back, the proper position may be secured by turning the eccentric 
pins in the lay sword upon which the pitman wyorks. Be careful 



t-4 



and turn both pins, or else the hiy will have a complex motion, 
for one distance between centres ^^"ill be longer than the other. 
If the pitman is too badlv worn to allow of this adjustment, it 
should be replaced bv a new one. 

If. bv reason of a f'tidly xcorfi picker, the bobbin, or cop. is 
placed in the shuttle so as to strike high up on the shuttle cover^ 
an additional piece of leather should be put under the leather on 
the lay end, to compensate lor the wear of the picker. 

The foregoing adjustments will remedv anv ordinary trouble, 
not occasioned bv breakage. The hopper, as a rule, gives very 
little trouble and requires scarcelv anv adjustment. 

The rotation of the hopper disc should always bring a bobbin 
into proper position. The disc bearing should be kept properly 
oiled, care being taken not to drip oil on the bobbins. If the 
weavers leave gaps bet\\"een bobbins when tilling" the hopper, 
thev mav have trouble. Thev should not allow these gaps to 
occur, as it is perlectlv easy to turn the hopper back and till it 
properh . 



The latest Xorthrop shuttle takes either bobbins or cops. 
It is shaped to prevent tilling from throwing forward and 
escaping from the eye. or looping around the horn. As 
fastened in the wood, there is no chance for catching either 
tilling or \varp threads. 

The spring cover at the rear is inclined so that if the shuttle 
is too far into the box. the bobbin, when striking the incline, can 
push the shuttle into place so that the bobbin can enter the spring- 
properly. 



1^5 



If tlio tliirad entrances to the eye ^-et jainiiiod or closed, they 
ean be opened Un kiiil'e blade, or otiier tool, hut care should he 
taken not to open these entrances any wider than they were 
ori^inallw 

If the e}e becomes clos^'i^'cd with cotton or lint, it should be 
cleaned out. 

A small piece of flannel is placed at the throat of the 
shuttle for friction, which can be easily renewed. When coarse 
tillino is usetl, it may lie necessary to put bunches of slasher- 
waste, or bristles, throui^h holes in the side of the shuttle, to 
make additional friction. These must be put in by the loom 
fixers, as we cannot send them out in this way, not knowing- just 
what conditions arise in weaving-. 

If the shuttle spring gets loose, it should be tightened up by 
turnini:^ the fastening screw. Shuttles should not be allowed to 
run with loose springs. We believe we have made considerable 
improvement in this direction by our latest spring and fastening. 

If trouble is finmd with cut filling, the wood near the shuttle 
eve may have become rough, and should be snn)othed with Hue 
sand paper, or emery, Aun small slivers or sharp edges should 
be removed by the same means. 

If warp threads should be broken out by the shuttle, it may 
be that the tips are l)lunt or rough, in which case the trouble may 
be remedied by polishing with emery cloth. 



SHUTTLI^ BREAKAGE. 

Outside of the usual splintering and slivering, generally 
caused by unfit wood, the actual breakage of shuttles on Northrop 
looms is probably due to the Ibllowing causes : 



126 



The shuttle may get pinched between the temple and the 
reed^ in case the protector fails to act. Our recent models of 
temples are designed to prevent this from happening. Of 
course, the fixer should follow up his work and see that the 
protectors are properly operative. 

Shuttles have been split by bobbin rings wedging between 
the spring grips ^ but this is of rare occurrence. We grind the 
ends of our springs now, so as to limit the chance of their press- 
ing against the shuttle sides. Of course, it is possible to break 
shuttles, if bobbins ai'e caught during transfer, or if certain 
parts of the loom are broken or inopei'ative. In spite of all the 
chances, our shuttles wear very well, considering that one shuttle 
runs continuously, the wear not being divided between two 
shuttles, as in the common loom. 

We furnish all the shuttles used with our looms, so have an 
actual record of their life, which runs over, rather than under, 
six months on the average. Excessive wear is often due to 
sharp reeds. 



SHUTTLE WOOD, 

Shuttle wood is liable to curious variations, both from 
natural and artificial causes. Sometimes the stock is too 
severely kiln-dried, taking all the life out of the wood so that it 
breaks like sealing wax. Shuttles are sometimes treated with 
hot solutions of wax or oil. This may improve the surface 
smoothness, but if not carefully followed up, may injure the 
stock. 



137 



SHUTTLE DESIGN. 

Shuttles are shaped to run true and balance as well as pos- 
sible. With the weight continuall}- changing and shifting, as 
the yarn weaves off, it is impossible to keep the centre of 
gravity in a uniform position. The shuttle is also pulled out of 
place b)' the drag of the yarn, which varies in tension as the 
bobbin or cop winds off. 

A perfect design would have the shuttle points on a line 
that would pass through the centre of gravity, with the weight 
fairly well distributed on each side of the centre. 

Shuttles made for front-bindei' looms have a longer back, so 
that the pressure of the binder in its last contact will not change 
the direction of the shuttle. We made all our looms with back 
binders for years, but are now ha\ing very good success with 
front V)inders on recent models. 



MISTHREADING. 

We use this term to illustrate the failure of the shuttle to 
thread itself properly. With our recent shuttles .this fault is 
almost entirely obviated. It is possible, however, if the filling be 
weak, or should the shuttle be picked too hard, that the yarn 
may be broken before it has a chance to thread up. The shuttle 
eye may possible get jammed or choked by lint so that the 
thread cannot enter at all. If this happens, the fork will be 
raised all right, for the thread will draw off the tojo of the shuttle 
on its first flight. When the shuttle is picked back, however, 
the thread will be broken, calling for a new transfer of filling 
and making a curious looking defect in the cloth, as the shuttle 



128 



will continue to lay threads going from the hopper and will lay 
none on the return. In weaving two shade goods this action 
puts several threads in one shade. In fact, it may continue this 
operation until all the bobbins have been transferred out of the 
hopper. Our present looms are so set as to stop for a double 
misthread, but even this will not prevent the fault just mentioned, 
as the fork will be raised intermittently. The misthread detector 
on the fork will act, however, if no thread is laid in front of 
the fork twice running. It may be possible for the fixer or the 
weaver to intentionally disarrange this motion so as to prevent 
the looms from stopping, but this should not be allowed, as it 
might cause a bad thin place if the hopper became exhausted or 
any accident caused repeated misthreading. The fact that the 
loom is found stopped, even when there is not a warp bi^eak or 
slack thread, does not necessarily mean that the shuttle has been 
misthreading. It is possible that the shuttle posiiioir detector may 
have prevented the shuttle from receiving a bobbin twice in suc- 
cession, and this would cause the loom to stop just the same as 
if it had failed to thread twice running. If the loom is found 
stopped with an empty bobbin in the shuttle it is a sure sign that 
the shuttle position detector has found the shuttle out of place. 
This means that the pick should be set so that the shuttle will go 
fully into the box or not rebound. Men with inventive capacity 
often attempt to improve on our shuttle eye, and we do not 
assume that improvement is not possible where we have made 
so many changes ourselves. It is necessary, however, to recog- 
nize the requirements of the case, as a shuttle eye for uni- 
versal use must be adapted not only for threading easily, but 
also prevent the filling from throwing ahead and getting out of 
the slot. It must also provide for easy passage of bunches, be 
practically self cleaning, give a proper friction, not weaken the 
wood materially, have sufficient weight to balance the metal 
parts at the other end, be fitted in the wood so as not' to catch 



129 



^varp or filling, and be designed for easy molding and machine 
Avork. As to the simple problem of threading shuttles, as far 
back as 1S94 we could transfer over 1,000 bobbins without a 
misthread. These records cannot be attained, however, \vithout 
proper setting of the loom. We believe the set of the pick has 
more to do with this trouble than anything else, and recommend 
, a light, easy pick with moderate pressure of the binder. We 
learned years ago that the amount of misthreading ^vas affected 
bv the moisture in the \veave room. Yarn is strengthened by 
moisture and strong yarn will naturallv break less under strain 
whether it is filling or wai^p. 



BREAKING OF FILLING. 

Every break in the filling causes extra labor, as the weaver 
must put a bobbin in the hopper twice at least in order to have 
its supply of filling Avoven off. Everv bobbin ought to -weave off 
clean, except on feeler looms, but a harsh pick may break filling 
by the jerk or cause it to throw out of the shuttle and catch 
on other adjacent parts. Sometimes the varn ^vraps around 
the j^oint of the bobbin or skew^er while running off. With 
our earlier shuttle we expected breakage on No. 36 filling at 
least one in ten bobbins, whereas we do not now expect more 
than one in twentv-five. It is easy to note how filling is 
limning by casvially glancing at the hoppers in the ^veave 
room to see how manv partlv filled bobbins have been put 
back in the hoppers. Filling sometimes catches on the picker or 
picker stick. Care should be taken to allo^v no cracks, projec- 
tions, or corners where the thread may loop when thro\ving out 
of the shuttle. With cop filling the yarn sometimes catches in 



I30 



the slot of the skewer. More trouble is occasioned by split cops, 
due either to shock in the shuttle box or poor design of spindle 
or skewer. This fault can be largely governed by the set of the 
pick and use of proper checks. There are many checks in the 
market which box the shuttle properly, but a shuttle must be 
received easily to prevent cop splitting, and there are very few 
checks which are adapted to this requirement and also to con- 
trolling the shuttle properly. 



BOBBINS. 



We have received a long and varied education in the require- 
ments of filling bobbins as we have purchased all of those used 
on our Northrop Looms ever since we commenced to build them. 
The complaints of our customers therefore all pass through our 
own office, although up to the present time we have not had any- 
thing to do with their manufacture. Bobbin wood is liable to 
serious fluctuation, especially when not cai-eftiUy selected and 
carefully dried. We believe the greater part of the trouble with 
bobbins getting out of shape is due to short seasoning, it being 
necessary to carry a very large stock of blanks in order to have 
sufficient supply of thoroughly seasoned wood on hand. Changes 
in the wood itself not only require reaming and the weeding out 
of badly ^varped bobbins, but also cause loosening of the rings 
before the bobbins are otherwise worn out. It is, of course, 
necessary for our loom that the bobbin rings should hold firmly 
so that the bobbin will lie properly in the shuttle. We insist on 
careful gauging of both wood and rings at the start, but the wood 
may change after the gauging process. The split rings applied 
to the bobbins are necessarily somewhat elliptical. In order to 



^31 



obviate trouble from this source the rings are apphed so that the 
slots will not be opposite each other. The bobbins will 
swell if filling is dampened so that they will not fit the 
spindles. This necessitates reaming, but the reaming should 
not be done while the bobbins are wet, as too much wood will 
then be removed. We are now introducing spindles with a cen- 
trifuo;al clutch that allows a loose fit with the bobbin on the 
clutch and allows more leeway for the fit. We believe this is 
one of the most important im^orovements ever made in the art. 
The contour of the bobbin varies with the kind of yarn spun. 
Bobbins for coarse filling require coarser steps on the cone. 
With coai-se yarn we use I3 steps, for print yarn 14. For coarse 
filling we usually recommend grooves on the baiTel instead of 
ribs. We have made careful experiments in order to determine 
the proper size of barrel for filling bobbins, and our standard 
patterns are all of uniform diameter. To avoid trouble with 
damp filling as much as possible we advise that the bobbins be 
filled with linseed oil and two coats of shellac applied after they 
are dried. Much trouble is found with filling yarn because the 
bobbins do not fit down properly on the spindles. We expect to 
obviate this trouble entirely with our new spindle, but the fault 
will necessarily continue in old mills. With the old pattern of 
spindle the bobbins should fit the sleeve at from one-half to five- 
eights of an inch, entering the cup (if there be one) at about 
one-eighth of an inch, fitting loose at the upper bearing, 
which should be at least 3-4 of an inch in length. Cups are 
really not necessary on our filling bobbins as the steel rings 
prevent splitting. 



132 



RBAMING BOBBINS. 

When the bobbins are reamed the reamer should be care- 
fully watched. Not over 500 bobbins should be reamed without 
testing the fit. Try the spindle in the bobbin and feel if there is 
play at the upper bearing. If not, the reamer needs spreading. 
To spread and sharpen a reamer, the temper must be drawn, the 
reamer placed in a vice and the part that reains slightly spread 
with a light hammer and a tool made for that purpose. The 
reamer must then be tempered. Any good mechanic can change 
the reamer to the proper size. A mill with 10,000 filling bob- 
bins should have at least six top reamers and two "pod" 
reamers. The upper bearing gives a great deal more trouble 
than the lo"wer bearing and it is well to have a surplus. Run 
the reamer at least 2,000 revolutions a minute, — 2,500 is better. 
A good man should ream from 7,000 to 10,000 bobbins a day. 
Every mill should have at least 20 bobbins to a spindle to each 
number of yarn used. To weave off in the shuttle properly the 
filling wind should be considered. We have found many mills 
where changes in the traverse would give better results. On 36 
yarn v\^e find best results with the rail going down quick and 
up slow in the proportion of 1 7 turns on the up-wind to 6 turns 
on the down-wind. This is on a traverse of i 1-2 inches. With 
coarser yarn like No. 22 we should recommend i 3-4 inches. 



PREVENTING BUNCHES IN CLOTH, 

All ^veavers know that when the last end of filling winds 
off from a bobbin it is liable to make a bunch in the cloth. 
Careful investisration has determined that these bunches are 



133 



practicall}' always due to the bobbins which did not start up 
properly when doffing and therefore require to be wound on by 
hand a few turns in order to piece up. These few turns are not 
wound tight enough to wind off properly and very possibly all 
come off together, which accounts for the fault noted. There is 
a common method of doffing which also aggravates this difficulty, 
when the doffers wind the yarn on the bobbins by giving it a few 
twists around the base instead of using the socket doff. The 
socket doff is certainly preferable. In order to avoid the trouble 
from the bunch with the bobbins not starting properly, Mr. 
Charles H. Arnold of Grosvenor Dale, Conn., designed a 
method in \vhich the doffers are provided with bobbins having 
sufficient yarn spun on them so that they can be pieced up. 
Whenever an end does not start in doffing, the doffer removes 
the empty bobbin and replaces it with the bobbin already pro- 
vided with enough yarn to piece up. In the weaving of fine 
goods this change reduces the seconds at once to a marked 
degree. The extra bobbins are of course furnished by spinning 
a slight amount of yarn on some extra bobbins at the frame and 
then removing them for use as noted. It is, of course, somewhat 
difficult to secure co-operation between the two departments, the 
spinner not often willing to go to extra work on the weaver's 
account. It is only, however, in this ^vay that good results are 
obtained. Mr. Arnold's idea is patented, but we allow its free 
use to all owners of Northrop Looms. 



134 



WINDING BUNCHES FOR FFBLBR 
BOBBINS. 

The bobbins used on our feeler looms are preferably spun 
with a preliminary bunch, the object being to reduce waste by 
preventing the operation of the feeler until all the yarn and part 
of the bunch have been exhausted. This bunch is wound about 
2 1-8 inches from the lower end of the bobbin and is about 3-8 
of an inch in length. We supply mechanism especially designed 
to govern the traverse of the spinning frames to automatically 
vs^ind this bunch and have them in use in many mills on various 
makes of frames. They are perfectly satisfactory in every 
instance where given a little care and oversight. No mechanism 
will run in a cotton mill without being properly oiled and 
cleaned. It is evident that if a feeler loom is set to ^vork with a 
bvmch that every bobbin should have a bunch. Bobbins, there- 
fore, which fail to start up at the doff should be replaced with 
special bobbins provided in advance, already having the bunches 
wound on them. It is, of course, possible to wind bunches on 
filling frames without automatic mechanism by simply holding 
the rail at the transfer point either by hand or by clamp. This 
method would, however, require special attention by an intelli- 
gent hand at the proper time. 



COB LOOMS. 



In vs^eaving with cop filling more care is necessary than 
with bobbins. Bobbin filling rarely loops off, while cops break 
in two for insienificant reasons. Our skewers are made froin 



135 

conventional patterns by an experienced builder and are designed 
to fit the sample cops which are sent us. We have to fit the 
skewers to the cops, as it will not do to assume that all cops are 
alike because they are spun on similar mule spindles. Some 
yarn is twisted harder than others and yarn is often spun both 
coarse and fine on the same spindle. Proper temper is very 
important, as the skewer should not only have the proper shape, 
but hold it and stay open. Many fixers spread skewers with a 
screw-driver or other tool, but this is very liable to break them. 
When a mill uses steamed cops it should be careful to send us 
sample cops after being steamed. Trouble with cops splitting is 
not necessarily due to improper shape of skewer or excessive 
pick at the loom. It may possibly be due to the lack of proper 
wind in the spinning room. Sometimes cop skewers on our 
looms get bent by catching in the shuttle. They should be care- 
fully examined at intervals to see that they are perfectly true. 
During the transfer the skewer strikes into the box with some- 
thing of a blow and we recommend that the cop tubes which 
are removed from the skewers be dropped in the box to make a 
cushion. 



WARP STOP-MOTIONS. THE STEEL 
HARNESS. 

With our sfee/ harness warp stop-motion the heddles them- 
selves are used as detectors to effect the stopping of the loom if 
a warp thread breaks or becomes too slack. Originally we only 
applied the steel harness for two-harness weaving, but are now 
using it for two, three, four and five-shade work with great sue- 



136 



cess. The hedclles of the steel harness are suspended by the 
heddle bars which pass through slots in the upper part of the 
heddles, the warp threads beiiig drawn through the eyes near 
the center. The lower ends of the heddles are free from the 
moving frame, but are guided by stationary devices which pre- 
vent their swaying too much either forward or sideways. Be- 
tween the harnesses is a long, flat casting called the stop-motion 
gij-t, which serves two purposes ; first, to separate the harnesses 
and hold them in position, and second, to resist the action of the 
feeler bar should a heddle drop down and be caught between it 
and the nrt. 



KNOCK- OFF MECHANISM. 

Upon the harness cam shaft there is a cam upon which a 
^^//(^Wd?;' works, which, through a small connecting ;W, operates 
the feeler bais. This cam follower is held against the cam by 
means of a small coil spring. Between this cam, and forming 
a part of the same casting, are two projections. Normally, 
these projections just clear the knock-off, which is a small casting 
fastened to the same stud or shaft that holds the cam follower. 
When the heddle drops, the feeler bar strikes it. The cam fol- 
lower is thus prevented from following the cam, and the knock- 
off on the shaft with the follower is moved ovit of its noi-mal 
position in such a way as to be struck by one of the projections 
beside the cam, thus moving the whole link on which the cam 
follower and the knock-off are fastened. This motion of the 
link is comniunicated to the shipper handle, throwing off the belt. 
When a heddle does not drop, the feeler bars oscillate back and 
forth, and the knock-off is held out of the way of the projections 
or lugs on the hub of the oscillator cam, and the loom continues 
running. 



137 



ADJUSTMENTS. 

In setting the steel harness stop-motion the first thing to do 
is to either throw off the belt, or remove the key which holds 
the end of the shipper-lever in the shipper-handle (in our later 
looms), and place the shipper handle in the notch in the shipper- 
lock; this will bring the stop-motion into the same position as 
when the loom is running. Then turn the loom until the feeler- 
bars are in their extreme forward position under the girt. The 
knock-off link should be against its bearing in the hub of the 
cam, and the cam-follower should bear against the cam in its 
lowest place. The small casting on the same stud as the cam- 
follower, called the knock-off, should be so set that it will just 
clear the projections on the hub of the cam as the cam revolves 
on the cam-shaft. 

The cam on this stop-motion is very similar to that used 
with the cotton hai^ness stop-motion. The position of the oscil- 
lator-cam is governed entirely by the harness-cams and should 
work in conjunction with them. When this cam is meshed 
with the harness-cams, which it does when the harness-cams are 
on the cam shaft, it must, of course, move with them ; but 
when the harness-cams are on the auxiliary shaft, care must be 
used to run the oscillator-cam in the right position. In this case, 
when the harnesses are level or passing each other, the oscillator 
cam should be so set that the long axis of the cam is horizon- 
tally level, or in other words, so that the faces of the cam point 
directly to the front and back of the loom on a horizontal line 
with the floor. 

The cam-follower is held in position by a spring on the stud 
to which it is fastened ; if it does not follow the cam as quickly 
as it should, tighten this spring. Care should be taken, how- 
ever, not to have too much tension on this spring, but just 
enough to make the cam-follower work properly ; otherwise the 



138 



heddlc would ])c l)C'nt; l)y the f(jrcc of llic l)low. Tlie motion of 
this cam-follower is communicated to the feeler-bar shaft by 
means of a connecting rod, the length of which may be varied 
at will by tin"ning to the right or left. 

On each side of tlie stcjp-motion girt, mider the warp and 
just touching it, are the front rod and l)ack rods, which hold the 
heddles in place so they will drop into position to be caught by 
the feeler-l)ar if a thread lireaks. These rods also h(;ld up slack 
threads which otherwise miglit allow the heddles to drop low 
enough to stop the loom. 

Small castings called hrildlc-bcir collars are placed on the 
heddle l)ars to keeji the heddles in line with the yarn. There 
are also guides at each end of the stop-motion girt to keep the 
bottom parts of the heddles in line. 

The harnesses are leveled up at the \arious positions of the 
crank: On underthrow looms from the bottom center to the 
front center, and on overthrow looms from the top center to the 
front center, according to the class of goods to be woven. 

The harnesses are connected to what are termed harness 
rolls at the top of the loom. Care should be used to have the 
hack harness connected to the lari^cst roll, and the front harness 
to the siiiallcsl roll, in order to work in harmony with the har- 
ness cams. In some cases the opposite to this has been done, 
interfering with the proper working of the loom. 

The front heddle bars are smaller than the back, and must 
be set in their proper position. 

The front and back rods should lie set just high enough to 
touch the \arn when the yarn is in its proper position on the 
race-plate. 

If the shade should be too high above the race-plate it can 
be lowered l)y turning down the set scrcivs in the castings at 
each side of the loom upon which the harness-roll rests, and 
then tisfhteninH' the connections between the hartiess-vokc and 



139 

treadles by raising the cap with the sprint; on top and turning it. 
If the shade should be too low, loosen the connection between 
the harness-yoke and treadles and raise the harness. The shade 
should just clear the race-plate. A great advantage with the 
steel harness is, that after the shade is once set it requires very 
little or no attention, and new warps can be put in without alter- 
ing the shade, and more quickly than with any other harness 
made. In putting in a warp, however, it is possible to get it 
tangled up ; but this can be avoided by a little care and common 
sense on the part of the operative. After the warp is once 
placed in the loom there is no danger of tangling. 

The bottom connection of the front harness should be 
placed in the second notch in the treadle and the back one in 
i\\Q fourth notch. 

The heddle-bars must be straight. If the heddles bind in 
any way on the heddle-bar it will show reedy cloth, and also be 
a serious strain on the yarn. No oil should be put on the hed- 
dles or heddle bars. 

It sometimes becomes necessary to apply a heddle to a 
harness bar after the warp has been drawn in, and this is usually 
done by breaking open the eye and slipping it on. While this 
is all right as a temporary expedient, it is well to go over the 
harnesses in the drawing-in room before re-drawing, and remove 
such heddles, as they are liable to catch and interfere, preventing 
the action of the warp stop-motion. 

One of the most annoying troubles formerly experienced 
with our steel harness looms was their liability to become mag- 
netized, thereby sticking together and making poor sheds. 
Some slight changes in construction have seemed to overcome 
this difficulty, as we hear very little from it, except on some of 
our earlier looms. It is perfectly easy to remove this magnetiza- 
tion by holding the heddles in an electrical coil, and we have 
demagnetized several lots for our customers. 



140 



Sometimes the lo'w^er ends of the heddles are seriously bent 
or twisted by the action of the vibrator. This is either due to 
poor adjustment, which brings a too severe strain, or is some- 
times caused by improper setting of the knock-off so that a 
dropped heddle receives several hundred or thousand blows, as 
the loom does not stop. The same trouble naturally occurs w^ith 
detector wires as well. 

Like every other mechanism that contacts with a cotton 
thread, the heddle is smoothed by use in a way which no previ- 
ous mechanical method can attempt to duplicate. Our steel 
heddles will therefore work much better after a few weeks' use, 
and cause much less warp breakage than when on their first 
warp. We polish the eyes in the best manner known — in fact 
we use especially invented processes ; but the rubbing contact of 
the cotton thread gives the final finish to the surface. It is 
impossible for this wear to ever make a sharp edge, as the thread 
turns its corner in such a way as to continually round the edge. 

So far as our experience goes we see no reason why steel 
heddles should not last indefinitely. We have had sets running 
at least eight years that are better than when made. Of course 
they may get bent or damaged by carelessness, but there is noth- 
ing in the normal operation to injure them. 

In our great variety of experiments w^ith various designs of 
steel harnesses, w^e have arrived at the conclusion that in order 
to secure the best results the heddles must be left with absolute 
freedom to adjust themselves to conditions. Every experiment 
designed to limit the position of the heddle in any w^ay, for any 
purpose, has alvs^ays resulted in excess of warp breakage. With 
certain weaves it has been noticed that the heddles will not act 
uniformly, the strain of the shed cavising them to sway or bend 
to excess. Where this becomes serious we have found it advisa- 
ble to use separators, which keep the heddles from swaying. 



141 



COTTON HARNMSS STOP-MOTION, 
ROPER TYPM. 

With this attachment, the ordinary tzuine or coUon harness is 
used, the stop-motion being applied between the harnesses and 
the lease rods, two or more threads being drawn through each drop 
wire. The threads in this stop-motion pass through long slots in 
the wires instead of round eyes, there being two such slots, — one 
for the passage of the threads, and the other for the passage of 
the drop wi?'e bar. We sometimes use a separate free bar or 
weight passed through the lo7ver slot and resting on the detectors to 
keep them vertical in action. The feeler bar girt, knock-off, etc., 
are similar to those already described. We also use a back rod or 
warp stpport, as with the steel harness. The stop-motion girt canhe 
raised or lowered and should be set in position for the feeler bar 
to clear the drop wires when the shade is wide open and no warp 
threads broken. It should also be set high enough so that when 
the shade is wide open it will not pull the drop wires up to their 
full limit on the dj^op wire bar. This can also be adjusted back- 
ward or forward so as to give room for additional harnesses. 
The feeler bar, which is the piece of sheet steel bent at right 
angles with teeth in the edge, should be set so that when it has 
reached the end of its forward movement, it will pass under the 
girt close to it. While this form of stop-motion will apply for 
many forms of three, four and five harness weaves, there are 
special classes of shading to which it will not apply. We have 
therefore introduced the third form, the single thread stop- 
motion, which can be used with any style of weaving, including 
dobbies and jacquards. 



14^ 



SINGLM THREAD STOP-MOTION. 

With this construction, there is one detector for each thread. 
We apply it in several ways, our more common method in the 
past being to arrange the detectors in two banks., and use them 
also to do all leasing instead of the ordinary lease rods. We can 
make it in three banks if necessary. When used in two banks, 
there are_//v;//and back box plates instead of the center girt. The 
feeler bar is different in being a flat piece of steel with notched 
edges, oscillating between the two banks. To prevent detectors 
from slipping or bending under the twisting strain, we place 
serrated pieces of steel on the bottoms of the box plates. The top 
edges of the box plates serve as wa7p supports. The feeler bar 
having double action needs two knock-offs and two connecting I'ods 
between the cam and the folloiver shaft. 



ADJUSTMENT. 

In setting this stop-motion, throw off belt or remove key as 
before, placing the shipper handle in its notch in the shipper 
lock. Set the knock-off link, (the long casting forming connec- 
tion to the shipper handle,) against its bearing on the cam hub so 
as to have no back lash. Then place the feeler bar in the center 
between the box plates and adjust the tivo small castings on the 
feeler bar shaft w^hich ^ve call the tight and loose oscillator fingers. 
These should project or hang evenly on each side of the shaft. 
Now loosen the set screw which holds the stop-motion cam on the 
cam shaft so as to be able to revolve the stop-motion cam by hand 
and set the tight knock-off, the small casting fastened to the stud 
in the knock-off link by a set screw, so that it will clear the point 



H3 



of the cam hub 1-16 to i-S of an inch. Turn the cam by hand 
until the cam follower rests on the lowest point of the cam and 
the feeler bar is near the back box plate. Then connect the loose 
oscillator finger \\\2i\. is on the feeler bar shaft with the cam follower 
by means of the connecting rod, and adjust the rod so that as the 
cam revolves the feeler bar will be moved from side to side 
equally. When this has been done, connect the tight oscillator 
finger that is on the feeler bar shaft with the loose knock-off by 
means of the connecting rod and adjust the rod so that the knock- 
off will clear the point of the cam hub as the cam revolves. If, 
when these connections and adjustments are made, the feeler bar 
should not move an equal distance each side of the shaft, the 
trouble may be overcome by further adjusting the connecting 
rods. The spring on the j///^/ which carries the knock-off awA cam 
follower should be set just tight enough so that the cam follower 
will follow the cam properly. The tension of the spring on the 
loose oscillator finger on the feeler bar shaft should be so regu- 
lated that it will hold the two fing-ers tosrether on the shaft. 



RELEASE MOTION. 

With all of our warp stop-motions except the steel harness, 
trouble was formerly experienced on account of the feeler bars 
grasping and holding the detector after the loom had been 
stopped by a broken end. In such a case the end was drawn in 
without raising the detector, so that the loom was stopped a sec- 
ond time, or else the weaver ^vas compelled to find the detector 
and release it from the grasp of the feeler bar by hand. 



'II 



We now .iiipU' willi (Mil lolldii Ikmih'ss vv;it|) slop-iiiol ions, 
(lc\i(fs wliiili iiiildin.ilic.ilU iclc.isc ;i (hopped (Iclccldr upon 
stopp.'ij^c ol llic loom. 'I'liis Icilinc involves ;ilinost no .iddi- 
lion;d p.iih., is po;,i(i\c in .itlion, ;ind s.ivcs lonsidciiihli- lime 
lor llie \\(;i\»i. Il is e\ehisi\c will) lis, .ind Inlly covered l)y 
p.'ileni . 



SI.ACk' TIlRliADS. 

S/ihk tllitUli/s olleii I'.'iiise lioiil)le li\ IcIliiiL; \\;iip di'leilois of 
;in\ p;iltein diop low enoiit^h lo eiiL;'.i.L;t' llir \ i|)i;ilo|- ;ind slop llu" 
loom, ejiisinj; ;inno\ ,inee l<i llie wc.iver, who m;i\' hiinl ;i Ioiil;' 
lime lof I he siipposedU hioken ihre.id. Soinelimes Ihe lionhle 
is due l(» Ihe whole w.iip heiii;; woven loo sl;uk li\ impiopei" 
(ension ol Ihe lel-oll, Iml I In- ^reiiliT dillii'nll y is I'rom individual 
(hre;ids. We li;i\e hied lo jirriiu^^e suiru'ieni leewiiv lo ovcivoiue 
Ihis lionhle, lull il il is loiiiid sei ions, Ihe mill should ^i\i' moii" 
Jilli'iilion lo ils ui(U/>iiii; .ind \/<f\/////i;. .Somi'liincs the ivliitivc 
posilion ol Ihe i^'irl will) rel.ilion to Ihe whip-roll is llie soni\H' of 
Ihe lionhle. ( )n some peeiili:ii' l.iiu\ w e;i\ cs wheii- m.iii\ li;ii- 
IK'.ssi's are emplo\i'd, several ol Ihe Ihii'ads will remain lu-ei-s- 
HMl'ily slaek ;ill Ihe lime. If Iheic ,iie lull a few of Ihese lliieads 
il is easy lo ohviale Ihe lionlile hv U'lliiii; Ihem ///// williotlt 
(UtectorSy as Ihev are iiol liahle lo hreak in anv I'venl on aeeomil 
of llu'ir slaekness. If I here is a ^ri-al mimlu'r of loosi- (hivad.s in 
llu' pallein, il may hi- advisahk' to \\\\\ Iheni on a separate warp 
I' f a til. 



w Ah'r ma: \i< {(.li. 



I'A'cr 'lilicc mil lii:,l r -. |)(| iliMlll, wil I) Nol I |||(»|) l,(»ul||h, WC 

liiivc cdiil iiiiKiiitJy iiiii l.'iij'i' iiiiiiiliri ;', III llii'iii ill mil own .'JiMpu 
willi (Hrcliil Ml|)^lvi^iml .iml iiK.|ii'( i joii nl iiimlui I, ;iiii| vv li rl 
•tli;il Wi' li;i VI' Ii.'mI iiioic ;ii I ii;iI Ic:,! ■, iii.idr ol \ ;ii ions Wr;i vi II}.', run 

ditioiih lli;iii li;iv»' Itct'U i nllci h .1 liy iill oIIht c'\|jt'riiiu'nU'i'H itii 
looillfi in ;ill lime. Smin ol IIm rchullh !ll'(' I'lllloiis, Hliovvill^ 
how iiii|)oii;,i|)|r il i;, lo i|i;ivv dflinilc i om Injon;, lioni iii;i> liimiy 
Ih.'il I'lnployH HO v.'iriiihlf u nidU'ii.'il w.. < ollon (ilnc. W<' Ki<|) ;iii 
;i( ln;il M'( oi'il oi' wiirp IhciiIoi^c find lind lli.il il v.'iiich in dirii'icnl 
yfjHh Iroiii !i(s liif^di iih i.| w;ir)) lin.d.;- pi i joom pn i nl in our 
yr;ii down lo ;in ;ivcr;i^c ol i .', in .iiiollici, willi no p<i i rpl ilijr 
('li.'ili}.',(' in I iindilion:> olliri lli.in IIh i|ii.iiily ol Ijir i ollon m^d in 
Mi.'ikiii;', llic y;iin. All I'.now lli.il IIh lijiii o| ddli u nl • loph i;-. 
nol :,iniil,ii . I liidri I III' ol i|in;ii y I ondil ioii.'i we t'Npri I I li;il I In 
hrc.'ik.'ij^c on priiil w.'iip willi cillicr hh rl m i ollon linrncfih tdioiild 
iivi'l'ii^f Itclwrcii lo ;iiid 1"^ liir.'ilvN pit Mil. II Will p l;l('(iKii^c 
WiTc I" I"' ii'diH id willionl iilli'iilimi l.iiii)' p.iid lo oIIh i l;ii loi'H, 
lomiK, witiild 1)1' ipiilr dilli'ii'iil ly di'^.ifOH d. I n m d< i lopiodiirc 
iii/ii'/ on lln- ilolli IIh' yarn i:, s/niiih'd Ihin/ii in llir lonhi Jnidi' 
iiiid ;.liri|ilin;', i anih (ll'i! fj^'ivt'ii a /rihy iiidlinii in oidi i lo l-n p llir 
hh.'ldc« open loi III!' :,liiillli lo p.i!,;-, piopi'ily. ' )iii Jill liaiiu'HH 
will liii'al-. iiioH I'lid', loi III! |ii;,| li'w wt't'kh wild'' III'' yain !h 
^j;ivin|.', a Imal polrli lo I In lyi',. luu/ ictu/s arc liaMi lo i aiisc 
iionlili', in lai I many iiiill', appi ai lo liii\ lliiii \vit\', willimil any 
I on:,idii al ion ol i|ii;ilily wlialrvt')'. 



146 



KNOTS. 

It was figured some }ears ago that two-thirds of the warp 
breakage on a loom came from the /;/?ofs made in piecing the 
yarn together, as these knots would fray adjoining threads or he 
caught w the reeds or betitieen the heddles. The number of knots 
is reduced by spooling from hirge 7varp bobbins^ and by making 
good yarn which will ha^■e feiv piecings to cause breakage at the 
spooler or warper. A certain number of knots is unavoidable, 
but the wa>- the knot is tied affects the situation materially, in 
the old liand method the operative at the spooler tied a knot with 
long ends, so that for some time we advised the tying of a 
zveaver's knot at the spooler, which would not only have short 
ends, but be less objectionable in size. We believe that in 
Europe spooler tenders are forced to tie a weaver's knot, and some 
mills who adopted the practice here fovmd no trouble after getting 
the help trained, the girls spooling as great a product as before. 
Since the introduction of the automatic knot t\<er, however, 
spooler knots as tied bv machinery become much less objection- 
able as the machine leaves short ends and apparently ties the 
knot hard and compact. The automatic knot-tyer has gone into 
such extensive use that our recommendation is practically 
superfluous. 



HARNESS CAMS. 

It is absolutelv necessary for good shedding to have the 
treadle rolls in continuous contact with the cams. If there is too 
much angle on the cam point there naturally will be more ten- 
denc}' to throw. Harness cams should be set to start opening 



147 



the shades with the lay at the bottom center of the crank. If titj;ht 
selvages are desired the cams may be delayed a little, or conversely, 
for loose selvages^ the lay may be pushed back a little. This 
apiDlies to looms running in the usual American manner, known 
as the under-throw . With over-throiv looms, of course, the setting- 
would be directly opposite. We built several orders of over- 
. throw looms for certain of our customers at one time, but found 
that they had no appreciable advantages which could not be 
secured as well by simple changes in design on the under-throw 
principle. As to shape of harness cams we decided after exten- 
sive tests to use a 60^^ rest cam with all widths of loom up to and 
including 40 inch. If read with relation to the upper shaft, 
these cams would be known as I30° rest cams. On wider looms 
the rest is made longer vmtil on 108-inch looms we put on iSc*^ 
rest cams. There is no definite fixed rule about the shape of the 
cam. Different weavers have different ideas as to the amount of 
rest and the amount of shade opening. We try to satisfy our 
customers according to the goods woven and the width of loom 
weaving them. In many cases the proper cam can only be 
determined after experiment. 



Selvage threads are usually looser than the others, often caus- 
ing the edge of the cloth to crinkle or be longer than the center. 
This is due to carelessness in setting the temples. If the temple 
is too far back, the yarn will draiv around it and stretch the 
thread, as the width of the cloth in the reed is greater than in 
the woven piece. If the temple roll is not free or runs hard for 
any cause, it will stretch the threads in the same way. Also if 



148 



the yarn is not put on the yarn beani properly ; that is, if it is 
filled higher at the ends than in the center, the yarn will be 
stretched. Where double threads are used for the selvage and 
pass through one harness eye, they cannot control the warp stop- 
motion unless both of them should break at once. Many mills 
use tivisted selvage threads, which, of coiu'se, overcome this 
trouble. As there is more strain on the selvage threads the 
twisted threads would seem to have an advantage also in lessen- 
ing warp breakage. 



CARE OF TBMPLBS AND TBMPLB 
THRBAD CUTTERS. 

To insure proper care of temples, system is necessary and 
we strongly recommend the practice of all up-to-date mills who 
have the loom fixers tahe out the temple i-olls and thoroughly clean 
them and slightly oil the pins that hold the roll in place every time 
a warp is run out before a new one is allowed to be started. The 
fixer should also examine the temple thread cutter at the same 
time. With this amount of care the usual troubles will be 
entirely eliminated. The temple thread cutter is only supposed 
to cut the thread leading from the hopper stud to the cloth when 
the filling is changed. A loose thread at the selvage left by the 
filling running out will not necessarily be cut by the thread 
cutter, so that the presence of such threads does not indicate that 
the thread cutter is not working. These loose threads are com- 
mon on all looms. In setting temples, place the lay fully 
forward and adjust the temple head to be abovit 1-16 of an inch 
from the I'eed. The thread cutter knife can be removed by 



149 

detaching the spring on the cutter arm and pulHng the cutter out, 
at the same time raising the front of it as high as possible. It 
can be rephxced without difficulty. A strip of leather should be 
placed on the la}' opposite the temple heel and cutter arm to 
strike them when the lay comes forward. The strip at the 
thread cutter side should be long enough to strike both the 
temple /zcr/and the cutter arm. 



f:eeler filling changeb. 

The feeler /notion is placed on the left hand side of the loom 
when the hopper is on the right hand side. It is set to pass 
through slots in the fro7it box plate and shuttle, coming in contact 
Avith the yarn on the bobbin or cop as the lay beats forward. 
When the filling in the shuttle has been nearly woven off so that 
it will no longer move the feeler, the filling-changing mechanism 
or battery operates, supplying a fresh bobbin or cop to the shuttle 
Avhen it is thrown to the other side of the loom. In case the 
filling breaks before it has been woven off sufficiently to 
operate the feeler, the loom will stop, thus enabling the 
weaver to find and match the pick by hand, as in common 
loom weaving. The mechanism can be set, however, so 
that it will supply fresh filling at such times. This makes 
infrequent faults and on some goods where it would not 
do to have mispicks every time the filling changed, it might do 
no harm to have a mispick at long intervals between breakages 
in the filling. To set the feeler, place an empty bobbin or cop 
skewer in the shuttle and bring the lay to its extreme forward 
position. Turn the adjusting screw in the feeler until its end is 
about the thickness of a layer of yarn from the bobbin or 



I50 



skewer. Then take several bobbins or skewers having a small 
quantity of yarn on them, place one in the shuttle, and start the 
loom. If it is thrown out before enough filling is woven off, set 
the feeler nearer. If the filling runs out entirely before the bob- 
bin or skewer is thrown out, the feeler adjustment should be 
moved back. Several trials may be necessary before the feeler 
is set properly. The coil spring around the shank of the feeler 
regulates the pressure on the filling in the shuttle. The tension 
on this spring should be as light as is consistent with proper 
action. If too strong, it will push the bobbin out of line. From 
time to time the weaver should examine the front of the feeler 
arm which enters the shuttle and contacts with the filling. If 
rough, it should be rubbed with a little emery cloth or it may 
wear the filling and break it. While our present feelers are set 
to run independent of back lash, and looseness in the lay pitmen, 
it is well, of course, to have lost motion taken up. Extra pains 
should be taken to see that the shuttle boxes are properly set at 
the feeler end or the feeler may strike the shuttle itself instead of 
passing through the slot. 



FEELER THREAD CUTTER. 

The threat/ cutter used as an auxiliary on our feeler looms is 
attached to the casting called the shuttle position detector^ which is 
moved up to the lay whenever a change of filling is called for. 
If the shuttle is boxed properly so that the detector does not con- 
tact with the tip, the thread cutter will cut the filling which 
extends from the cloth to the bobbin, the full supply not being 
woven fully off. A clamping device holds the end extending from 
the cloth to the cutter in position so that the regular temple thread 



151 



cutter will cut it again close to the cloth. The thread is thus cut 
in two places ; first, as close to the shuttle as possible, so that 
the bobbin when expelled can easily drag it out; and next, 
it is cut close to the selvage. In setting the cutter, take 
pains to see that the jaws will engage the thread properly. 
Heavy filling may require a slightly different setting than light fill- 
ing. To raise or lower the device, change the position of the 
stand on the loom side to which the. whole device is fastened. It 
seems almost useless to explain that the feeler requires special 
bobbins with cylindrical contour, but parties have actually tried 
to run the feeler with regular bobbins at times. With our earlier 
forms of feeler any change in position of the firont box plate 
required readjustment of the feeler itself. This is not necessary 
with the two styles illustrated in this book. 



Let-off motions may be divided into two general classes, 
tension and friction. Tension devices are intended to let off a 
definite amount of warp at each stroke of the lay. It is evident 
that as the warp beam runs out, it is necessary to turn it in pro- 
portion to the reduction in diameter, as there must be more 
movement when nearing the empty beam. With the Bartlett 
let-off., it is usually necessary to regulate the tension by adjust- 
ment of the collar on the trombone as the beam weaves off, so that 
enough teeth of the ratchet ^n\\\ be taken up each time. Gener- 
ally speaking, the warp beam should turn about three times as fast 
when empty as when full, and surely move at least one tooth of 
the rachet at each motion of the lay. Improper delivery of yarn 
will cause uneven strain of the cloth, making it vary in width 



152 



and also increase warp breakage. Sufficient friction should be 
put on the let-off wheel to prevent it from running by the point 
where the pawl leaves it. The let-off motions that we now use 
are the Bartlett^ friction with rope chain or leatheroids^ and our 
latest mechanism called the Draper-Roper self-adjusting let-off. 
The Bartlett and friction are standard devices needing no special 
description here. The self-adjusting let-off is w^hat its name 
implies, that is, when the tension is once set, there should be no 
need of adjusting it at any time for tlie class of goods being 
woven. If the goods are changed the tension can be changed to 
accommodate the new conditions. This let-off will keep the 
cloth at more uniform width than any other, because the tension 
is also uniform. No special reference to detail is necessary as 
the adjustments are similar to the Bartlett. 



WARF BMAMS. 

There is, of course, an advantage in putting as much yarn 
as possible on the beam, and our new let-off will allo^v large 
beams with little trouble, as the tension can be regulated to the 
greater difference in diameters. The larger the beam the more 
the trouble with crossed threads. We soon changed from i6 to 
1 8-inch beams, and fvu"nish 20-inch beams for coarse yarn. At 
the present time we do not recommend larger than iS-inch for 
fine numbers. 



153 



TAKB- UP. 

The take-up tnotion in use on all present styles of Northrop 
Looms is what we call the high rolL As the name implies, the 
take-up roll is placed high up, next to and inside the breast 
beam. This roll has a gearwheel at one end meshing with an 
intermediate gear which in turn meshes with the change gear, the 
change gear being driven by the ratchet take-up wheel, located 
about half way between the front girt and breast beam. The 
ratchet wheel is operated by the take-up paivl ^m\\\z\\ is attached 
to the lay sword, and as the lay swings back, takes up one tooth 
at every pick. This description refers to the E Model looms. 
The J Model take-vip is quite different. The ratchet wheel is 
prevented from letting back by the hold-back pattili?i&tened to the 
cloth roll stand. Inside of the hold-back pawl and on the same 
stud is the let-back pawl. When the filling breaks the hold-back 
pawl is lifted, allowing the let-back pawl to let back the ratchet 
wheel from one to three teeth, as the quality of the cloth may 
require, thus avoiding cracks or thin places. The change gear is 
composed of two gears in one casting, one of which meshes into 
an intermediate gear and the other into the gear on the hub of 
the ratchet wheel. This gear is held in place on a swinging or 
half circle stand. Each tooth on the large end of the change gear 
usually represents two picks ; for instance, for 64 picks use a 33- 
tooth change gear, and a 50 gear for 100 picks. After leaving 
the take-up roll, the cloth is wound on a smooth iron roll called 
the cloth roll, held in place against the take-up roll by the cloth 
roll racks. The cloth roll as we now make it has teeth cut in the 
ends to be turned by gears on the take-up roll shaft, so that the 
cloth roll will ^di a. positive rotation ^n\\A& starting to wind the 
cloth. As soon as a little cloth is wound, these teeth will not 
mesh and the rest of the cloth will be wound by friction alone. 



154 



The cloth roll racks have teeth meshing into gears at each end of 
the spring shaft. The spring is wound up by a gear and worm 
wheel and handle attached to the front girt. When not in use, the 
handle can be put in the notch provided for it and be out of the 
way of the operative. Cloth can be removed from the roll at 
any time, the weaver taking off cuts when convenient. As the 
take-up roll is made of metal, it will not change on account of 
the weather like a wooden one. The fillet is fastened to wooden 
blocks inserted into holes in the metal roll. The take-up roll is 
adjustable vertically and can be raised or lowered to adjust the 
level of the cloth on the lay and give cover. Our new pattern 
of take-up lets the cloth run over several stationary rolls \)e.ioxe 
giving any contact with the take-up roll, so as to give more 
sti-etch to the cloth between the take-up roll and the lay, which 
is desirable on certain classes of goods. With the ne-sv form of 
take-up the cloth can be laui direct to the roll if desired. 
The strength of the coil spring on the spring shaft may be 
varied by turning the collar to which it is fastened. When 
the take-up roll is empty and the cloth roll is forced up 
against it, the zuorm on the spring shaft shovild be in such 
a position that the handle by which it is tvu"ned should just 
slide off and drop into its notch. The loose pawl inside the hold- 
back pawl has three small holes through it in v^hich to place an 
extra pin. Each of these holes repi^esents one tooth on the ratchet 
wheel, that is, if the extra pin is in the first hole when the loom 
stops the ratchet will let back one tooth. If in the second hole, 
two teeth. In the third hole, three teeth, according to the 
demands of the cloth. When setting the let back pawl, turn 
the loom over until the filling cam follower or tveft hammer is in its 
position nearest the breast beam. Pull the filling fork up over the 
hook on this cam follov\^er and now the change mechanism will 
be in operative position. There is a finger ia.8tened to the starting 
rod by a set screiu which should be turned until it extends under 



155 



the small arm on the take-up pawl and just lifts it out of its 
engagement with the ratchet ox pick wheel. This is to accomplish 
the letting back of the take-up at the time transfer takes place. 
This should be looked after from time to time with great care, 
to see that the pawl is actually thrown out of engagement every 
time there is a transfer, allowing the ratchet wheel to slip around 
to the extent determined by the pin in the loose pawl inside the 
hold-back pawl. Otherwise thin places will certainly be caused. 



FILLING FORK. 

A filing fork can act improperly by rebounding so as to 
avoid catching on the hook of the cam folhnaer. Our own fork is 
designed to balance properly; in fact, we think it the best 
balanced fork in use. A fork can also operate improperly by 
being raised by a dragging filling thread, after the filling in the 
shuttle is exausted. If the shuttle drags the thread end into the 
left hand box ^ unless the filling is rather coarse, it probably will not 
have strength enough to raise the fork. Our double fork, however, 
will protect against any such trouble by detecting from the other 
end of the loom if one fork be operating improperly. 

If a fork is very light in action, it may be lifted by lint 
collecting in front of the grid. The more common trouble, 
however, is due to the lay shifting position, so that the fork tines 
will strike the grid and thus be improperly raised when the fill- 
ing is absent. Of course, any false operation of the filling fork 
when used singly will cause thin places when the filling runs ovit, 
as no change of filling will be called for so long as the fork 
continues to lift. 



156 



Our double fork gives a double chance against faulty opera- 
tion ; but even vs^ith the double fork a shifting lay may operate 
both improperly. We therefore designed some of our early fork 
stands to be guided by the lay so that if the loom shifted, the 
stands would shift also. More recently, however, we have 
adopted a lay guide attached to the loom frame and sliding in 
another casting bolted to the lay, so that the side position of the 
lay must always be constant. 

Filling forks are made in two general styles, one with soft 
metal tines^ so that the fixer can bend them into any shape desired ; 
the other made of tempered metal, so they cannot be bent. We 
prefer to make our forks right at the start, using tempered wire, 
so that they cannot be bent. In our present construction, the 
tines are cast into place and their position is absolutely fixed and 
unchangeable. Our present forks are all made -with three tines ^ 
although we have furnished/^//;- tine foi'ks for special light goods. 



LOOM LAY. 

A stif^. heavy lay is absolutely necessary to w^eave heavy 
goods, although if the stiffness could be had without the weight, 
it v\rould probably accomplish the same pui"pose. The hand rail 
must, of necessity, be stiff in proportion. 

Much trouble is experienced with lays if the wood is not 
properly seasoned before use. We find it advisable to rough 
out our lays and let them season some time before finishing. 
We carry a large stock of lay timber on hand ahead of orders, 
so that we shall not be forced to use unseasoned stock by any 
uncommon demand. 



^57 

The position of the pivot from which the lay swings with 
relation to the position of the crank shaft determines the eccentric- 
ity of the lay's motion, which is advisable in order to give the 
shuttle more time in crossing, and also to help give cover to the 
cloth. 

After a great deal of experimenting, we have adopted a 
design suggested by Mr. Robert Burgess, then agent of the 
Grinnell Corporation, who tested looms of various constructions 
for us in determining this point. It is, of course, understood 
that all of these jerky motions make the loom run harder, and 
probably bring more strain on the warp, but long experience 
has determined that it is better to sacrifice smooth running to 
other considerations. 

The raceway for the shuttle should be absolutely true, and it 
is advisable to go over looms with a straight edge at times to 
detect any error. The raceboard should be slightly lower than 
the level of the shuttle boxes, in order to allow for the thickness 
of the threads which rest on the race underneath the shuttle. 



REED. 

The reed should be either set in an exact plane with the 
shz/ttk box back plates, or slightly back to allow for variations, as 
it will plane the shuttle if too far front. It should be set at 
exact right angles with the shuttle race, the hand rail or reed-cap 
being filed to fit, and forced firmly into place. 

The purpose of the reed is simply to beat in the filling 
threads, and furnish a back guide for the shuttle. As 
the dents furnish more or less of an obstruction to any 
bunches or knots in the yarn, it is advisable to have them as 



I5S 



thin as is practicable, in order that they may offer little surface 
for side contact, and also be free to give slightly when necessary. 
In order to have a good running reed, the edges of the dents 
should be strm'g/i/ and smooth. In nearly every case where, mills 
have complained of shuttles \vearing excessively on the back, it 
has been because the dents of the reed were sharp, scraping the 
backs of the shuttles like a fine file, and fluting \\\&xn so that they 
looked something like a miniature washboard. 

In the manufacture of reeds, the straightening and polishing 
of the dents is by far the most expensive and slowest part of 
reed making, and when not properly done, simply indicates a 
poor job, and an attempt to make an extra profit. Shdrp ireds 
are also very hard on the warp yarn, the blame of bad running 
warp often being put on the quality of the yarn, when it is really 
the reeds that make the trouble. To test a sharp reed, draw the 
finger nail edgewise across it, and if it wears the nail, the reed is 
sharp and not properly polished. The dents should not bite the 
nail any, and should, of course, be in line. Manufacturers 
should insist on having smooth reeds, and inspect them carefully 
to be svu'e that they get what they order. There are reed manu- 
facturers who supply proper reeds and have pride in their ]-epu- 
tation. It is not our business to recommend special dealers, but 
we are often tempted to when noting what inferior svipplies are 
sometimes attached to our looms. 

The reed dents should be as thin as possible, to allow elas- 
ticity and can, of coui'se, be made deeper, if the thinning is 
inexpedient without it. The manner of holding a reed in the 
lay is not so positive as it might be, since reeds vary so much in 
contour. We formerly used an adjustable fliter hy which the reed 
could be positively clamped, no matter what its size. The idea 
was good in itself, but we found that fixers were liable to screws 
the bolts up too tight and pull the reed in front of the shuttle box. 
We have therefore gone back to the old jred groove system, but 



159 



have improved its form so that it seems sufficiently efficient. In 
order to fit this groove properly, it is necessary for customers to 
send us several pieces of diffej-ent reeds ^ so that w^e may know how^ 
much their size varies. 



THROW OF LAY. 

When the lay is at the end of its forward stroke it must be 
in position to allow proper delivery of a fresh bobbin or cop to 
the shuttle. Any wear of parts that allows the lay to throw for- 
ward too much should be taken up, and if it becomes necessary 
to shorten the pitman to take up wear, the position of the lay 
can still be corrected by adjusting the eccentric pins in the lay 
swords to which the pitmen are fastened. Of course it is only 
necessary to adjust the pin at the hopper end of the la}- in order 
to get the shuttle box properly under the hopper, but great pains 
must be taken to adjust the pin at the other end of the lay exactly 
the same amount, or else the lay will have a curious eccentric 
motion, one end beating up further than the other, causing the 
shuttle to wear into the reed or strike the shuttle box sides 
improperly. If the wooden parts of the pitmen wear so badly 
that the eccentric pins will not furnish sufficient adjustment, the 
wooden parts should be replaced. If too much play is allowed 
in the pitmen bearings, there is possibility of cracks or slight 
thin places in the cloth when the loom stops. 



i6o 



SHUTTLE BOXERS. 

The back box plates are set at exact right angles with the lay 
end plates by filing the ribs or fitting strips at the back of the 
plates. The back box plates must be set in line with each other, 
the reed being preferably set slightly back of this line, as it will 
not do to run any chances of having the reed in front of this 
line. A long steel straight edge is necessary in order to try the 
plates and see that they keep in position. The front box plates 
should be set so that the top will lean slightly toward the back 
box plates, thereby reducing the liability of the shuttle raising 
in the box. If set at a right angle it will probably work all 
right, but it must not lean/zv/;/ the back box plate. At the same 
time it must not lean much toward the back box plate or it will 
wear the top of the shuttle. With back binder looms, the front 
plates are adjustable and should be set so as to line the point of 
the shuttle /// the centre of the picker stick slot. With the front 
box plate in position, adjust the binder properly by loosening the 
nut on the bottom of the lay and the screw which passes through 
the binder bearing, turning the eccentjHc bushing with the fingers 
until adjusted to the proper position. We have had a great deal 
of experience with different binder materials, at first being ready 
to follow the request of our cvistomers, until we had definitely 
settled the matter to our ow^n satisfaction. A binder may be of 
wood, wood with leather face, wood with steel face, wrought 
iron, cast iron, or iron with leather attached. We now prefer a 
zvooden binder faced with leather., as we find that leather does not 
wear the shuttle so badly as either wood or iron. Iron binders 
bring a hard pressure on the shuttle when the loom bangs-off with 
the shuttle part way in the box, the whole force of the momentum 
of the lay being transferred through the protector rod, binder 
fingers, and binder to the shuttle, often breaking its sides, as it is 



i6i 



pinched in its weakest part. The wooden binder will give 
sufficiently to relieve the shuttle, and we think the shuttle boxing 
is better also as there is more spring to the wood and less weight 
to be moved. 



PROTECTOR. 



The protector mechanism on the Northrop Loom does not 
differ in principle from that on other looms, so that detailed 
explanation is unnecessary. On our recent models we use a 
novel method of adjusting the binder finger, which we think will 
appeal to fixers. Protector rods sometimes become loose through 
wear. The caps which hold them can be tightened by filing. 
The pressure of the binder fingers on the binders is regulated by a 
protector rod spring in the usual way. Now that we are building 
front binder looms, we use a novelty of construction which ena- 
bles us to still employ the ordinary /rc^^ and dagger -^xotQcWow. 



BRAKE. 

All looms are equipped with brakes^ but in one class of 
looms the brake is worked solely from the protector motion when 
the loom bangs off, while on another class the brake also oper- 
ates every time the shipper handle is thrown off. The latter 
system is known as the ^'Filling-Brake system,'" for with the com- 
mon looms the brake is thus applied whenever the loom is 



l62 



stopped by the filling motion or fork. There is no question but 
that the application of the brake brings serious jar and strain on 
a loom. We know this positively, for we have many records 
taken of looms used with and without the filling-brake attach- 
ment, showing that looms which do not apply the brake at these 
frequent intervals, run v\^ith much less cost for repair, and much 
less loom fixing. We thought at one time the brake was also 
responsible for breaking of crank shafts, but further investigation 
proved that the more frequent reason for crank shaft breakage 
came from the strain of a tight belt, as noticed particularly in 
mills where looms were driven from small pulleys underneath 
the floor, with short belts necessarily kept very tight. 

While, therefore, we have a filling-brake system, and a 
most efficient one at that, we have recently discontinued its use 
on looms weaving goods where the picks were so frequent that 
the stopping of the loom did not make any possibility of a crack 
or thin place. On light goods we shall continue to apply them, 
and the parts, of course, are applicable to looms which may be 
sent out without them. Our loom has less use for a brake than 
the common loom as it does not stop for filling exhaustion or 
breakage. 

An}' brake, to work properly, should be carefully adjusted. 
When the brake acts by the motion of the frog holder it should 
not bring pressure upon the wheel before the belt is shipped. 
The braking surface should be set so as to bear upon as much of 
the surface of the wheel as is possible. This can be done by 
means of the adjustment at the bottom end of the brake. The 
leather on the brake will necessarily wear more or less, requir- 
ing- attention in order to obtain the best results. 



[63 



LOOM ADJUSTMENTS. 

Every new loom will jar screwed parts loose in the first few 
days it is run. All screws and nuts should be gone over care- 
fully, tightening them securely when loose. There are many 
theoi-ies about the pi'oper adjustment of whip-rolL harnesses, and 
breast-beavi or breast-roll. If cover is desired, an extra strain 
should be brought on the lower shed by raising the whip-roll, 
breast-beam or breast-roll, or both. Our high-roll looms are pro- 
vided with liberal adjustment for change in vertical position. 
Whip-rolls are also adjustable for the same purpose. 

In weaving drills or twills, strain is frequently brought on 
the top shade by preference. When this is necessary, the whip- 
roll and breast-beam should be practically as low as the race of 
the lay. 

It is, of course, necessary to adjust the shedding motion 
and timing of the picks so that the shuttle can pass through the 
shed without too much friction. These adjustments must vary 
with the width of the cloth woven, as it is obvious that with a 
wide loom more time is necessary. Looms are built with the 
crank shaft set lower than the lay pitman pivot, in order to give 
more time for the shuttle. The use of a short pitman accom- 
plishes the same purpose, if the bearing for the pitman is 
extended, but this construction necessitates heavier sword castings, 
and is not so desirable for that reason. 

The pick should be set so that the shuttle should just begin 
to move when the lay is in the center of its back stroke. 



164 



DRAWING-IN WARP. 

Drawing-in is necessarily expensive, and the question of 
twisting in warp has therefore been considered. We have made 
experiments in this direction, finding tliere was an actual saving 
in time of about 15 minutes per warp. The loom was kept 
from producing, however, during the time of twisting. Of 
course, warps can be twisted in outside the loom, in a frame 
made for that purpose. 

Our steel harness requires no extra labor, while drop wire 
warp-stops add to the cost of di-a wing-in. Large beams natu- 
rally reduce the expense. 

The Keene drawing-in frame is of great advantage for any 
of our stop-motions. 



SIZING WARP. 

Where drop wires are used with cotton harness, it is neces- 
sary to size the warp with additional care, taking pains to put 
the sizing into the yarn instead of on the outside, as is the cus- 
tom in a great many mills. The test of proper sizing is found 
in the amount of lint noticed, and the average warp breakage 
counted. No. 28 warp yarn should not break more than 10 to 
1 2 threads per day with a cotton harness stop-motion on- ordi- 
nary goods. Slow speed at the slasher gives a larger percentage 
of size. With our steel harness, extra sizing is not necessary ; 
in fact, not advisable, as it may actually increase warp breakage. 
We recommend the following mixtures for our cotton harness 
drop-wire system : 



i65 



Sizing for Sheetings: ioo gallons of water, 70 lbs. 
potato starch, 4 to 5 lbs. of tallow, i gill turpentine, i gill of blue 
vitriol: boil 30 minutes, or longer if necessary. 

Sizing for Prints: i 30 gallons of water, 60 lbs. potato 
starch, 3 lbs. ol" tallow, 7 lbs. of Victoria zinc ; boil from 20 to 
30 minutes. 

Sizing for Medium Weight Goods: i30 gallons of 
water, 65 lbs. of potato starch, 7 lbs. of tallow, 5 lbs. of alum ; 
boil 30 minutes. 

For steel harness simply add more water to the above mix- 
tures. Experiment will determine the proper amount for the 
conditions presented. 



LOOM pownR. 



We believe that all authorities are wrong on the question of 
the amount of horse-power required for the looms built today. 
The old experts figured from tests made with light pattern 
looms, run at low speeds. Every builder puts more weight into 
his loom today, and higher speeds are in vogue. It is possible 
that our loom requires slightly more power than the common 
loom for the same goods, as it uses a heavier shuttle, and we 
believe in a stiff, heavy lay. With our first print-cloth loom we 
had an admirable opportunity for test, as we ran a room of 80 
looms from a single engine, and could indicate the power abso- 
lutely. At 190 picks, they showed 3 3-4 looms to the horse- 
power, not counting the shafting. 



i66 



CLEANING LOOMS. 

It seems needless to emphasize the necessity of keeping any 
machine properly cleaned and properly oiled. Different mills 
have different systems in this respect, some insisting that the 
weaver shall clean and oil his own looms, while others have 
special cleaners and oilers. A loom should surely be cleaned 
and oiled every time a new warp is put in, and it should also be 
kept reasonably clean between such periods. The high-speeded 
mechanism needs oiling more frequently, and it should be 
remembered that every place where two metal surfaces are in 
rubbing contact demands oil. 

While we have never gone into the question of testing oils 
for looms, we believe that poor oil can do as much harm in the 
weave room as in the spinning room, and we recommend fol- 
lowing the advice of competent oil experts, even if their recom- 
mendation seems to involve slight increase of cost in the oil 
itself. 



REPAIRS. 



It is somewhat difficult to get at average figures of expense 
in this line, for new looms will need more frequent repair until 
the weavers and fixers get used to them. We can figure fairly 
well ourselves from the amount of parts sold to our customers, 
although many orders are for parts to be kept as stock on hand. 
Sometime ago we figured the average repair cost per loom per 
month at i3 1-4 cents, not including shuttles ox strapping. We 



167 

understand the repair cost of the common loom, including shut- 
tles, is about $3 per loom per year, and we estimate that the 
cost on our own looms would certainly be under $4 ; in lact, 
there are mills using both common and Northrop looms, which 
inform us that the repairs on their Northrop looms are actually 
less than on the common. 



PRODUCTION. 

Many mills take advantage of the capacity of the Northrop 
loom for running without the attention of the weaver by start- 
ing the machinery before the weaver arrives and also running 
during the noon hour and possibly sometime after the weaver 
has left at night. In such mills the production is often over 100 
per cent, of that possible during regular hours. The compari- 
son with common looms, which produce less than 90 per cent., 
is interesting. It is quite common for Northrop looms to give 
95 to 97 per cent, of product without the gain by running over 
time. A mill should not be especially proud of this showing, 
however, for it simply proves that their weavers are not spread 
01/ 1 oyer their Jj roper number of looms. It may take many years 
to kill the popular fallacy that production of cloth per loom is 
the great end for attainment. Production per weaver is rather 
the end that should be aimed at. 



i68 



LOOM spe£:d. 

We have never favored high speed for looms, although the 
Northrop loom can run at high speed if necessary. Simply as 
an experiment we have run one of our print looms at 280 picks. 
We have had looms running for weeks at a speed of 220 picks. 
There is nothing in the addition of our novel mechanism which 
limits the speed in any way. Our reason for advising low speed, 
therefore, is not because our loom is handicapped, nor because 
we wish to sell more looms, as some uncharitable persons have 
asserted. Increase of speed increases the breakage of warp, 
requires moi'e fixing and costs more for repairs. Since the 
introduction of the Northrop loom many mills in this country 
have speeded their common looms. Perhaps they wish to wear 
them out more rapidly and thus be ready earlier for replacement 
by Northrop looms. We doubt if there is any other good 
reason for the change. They run looms at high speed in 
England, but simply because of the domination of the trades- 
unions, which will not allow weavers to run more than four 
looms. Under such circumstances the manufacturer is bound to 
get all the product he can from each loom without caring espe- 
cially whether he increases the number of duties necessary. 



COSTS. 

The common plain loom, as ordinarily built, is largely a 
foundry product and the cost necessarily varies with the market 
prices of raw materials. In 1S94 '^'^ learned that an outside 



169 • 

builder estimated that a print loom weighing 900 pounds figured 
$37 for stock, $9 for labor, $3 for painting and $11 for general 
expenses with profit, making a total of $50. Most builders put 
more iron in their plain looms today, very possibly patterning 
after our own increase when we first commenced the building of 
looms. We invite comparison of our loom as a machine prod- 
uct with any other made, for we not only secure uniformity 
by machine moulding, but we also put more tool work 
into the loom parts than any other builder we know. Our 
foundry castings have a world-wide reputation and our tool 
equipment for the manufacture of looms is entirely modern. 
While the prices we charge for our product may seem high, the 
additional expenses of manufacture must be taken into account, 
as well as the extra mechanism which we supply. 



wast:e. 



We have no very recent figui-es on this subject. The filling 
waste in a Northrop loom print mill, as averaged from several 
weeks' test, showed .14 lbs. per loom per week on bobbin filling. 



LOOM MQUIPMBNT. 

The usual common loom, as sold to the trade, includes no 
extras in the way of parts not secured to the loom, except the 
beams, i 1-2 being figured to each loom. Our Northrop loom, 



lyo 



on the contrary, is furnished with one shuttle per loom, check 
stands, shuttle guard, filling fork, and one loom seat to every eight 
looms. We also furnish steel heddles or ivarp stop detector's in 
quantities as ordered and supply our own temples of whatever 
pattern desired, at regular prices. The following list specifies 
the extras which are usually purchased froin supply dealers, 
although we can furnish sample lots, if required, at their prices : 
Lug straps, lease rods. Jack sticks for cotton harriess, strapping, cotto?i 
harness, reeds, lease rod holders. We can supply thin place pre- 
ve7iters on order and also sell extra pick gears, att-xiliary shaft with 
gears for 3, 4, or 5-shade work, selvage motions, etc., at extra cost. 



DOUBLB PICK CLOTH. 

In view of the many attempts at introduction of weaving 
novelties that produce cloth with two threads in a shade, we might 
call attention to the fact that such cloth is easily woven on our 
Northrop loom by ivinding two threads on a bobbin. With this 
system double production is assured, but the cloth is not of the 
regular trade standard. We mention this not to suggest adop- 
tion, but merely to prevent waste of time on experiment with 
double bobbin shuttles, needle looms, etc. 



i7i 



CLOTH DEFECTS. 

Cloth as woven is usually inspected for imperfections, such 
as ^/luk and ^/lin places, cracks, oil stains, scratch-ups, thread runs, 
wrong draws, too many threads in a harness eye or reed dent, 
overshots, skips, kinks, loops, iinevenness, bareness, reediness, lack of 
weight, or narrow width. Thick and thin places are usvially 
caused by imperfect action of the let-off or take-up and on the 
Northrop loom by the filling fork being out of order. Cracks 
or slight thin places are caused by the loom stopping and being 
started, especially if the weaver turns the loom over while 
mending in warp or placing the shuttle. Our latest take-ups 
are arranged so that they will not operate unless the shuttle is 
picked. Excessive looseness of parts in the loom may also cause 
cracks when stopping or starting. Our double fork will cure 
thick and thin places and we expect to produce a take-vip that 
will absolutely avoid cracks. Oil stains usually result from 
carelessness. Care should be taken, for instance, in oiling the 
hopper stud on a Northrop loom not to let any excess of oil drip 
on the filling bobbins. If bobbins are allowed to drop on the floor 
they may get dirty and show streaks in the cloth. Scratch-ups 
and thread runs are practically obsolete where Northrop looms 
are used, for the warp stop-motion, if kept in order, will pre- 
vent either one. Wrong draws and extra threads should be 
detected by the weaver. Overshots are greatly reduced on our 
loom, especially with our steel harness motion. Of course, 
overshots are possible if the harnesses and pick motion are not 
properly timed. Skips are also caused by improper adjustment 
of the harness or pick, or if the picker is not in proper position. 
Kinks result from filling not being properly conditioned 
and also from weaving goods too nari'ow for the width of the 
loom. Also by using a too heavy fork., or not sufficient friction in 



172 



the shuttle. Too much power in the pick will also cause them. 
Loops are almost always caused by the harness not shading 
properly, especially on five-harness goods. Uneven cloth is 
usually made when the let-off or take-up is not working right, 
although uneven filling will also give the goods a similar appear- 
ance. The faults in the surface appearance of the cloth are 
determined from the standard set by the buyer, and this may 
vary so that a fault on one class of goods would not be detected 
on another. Weight and width must be kept right. We 
believe our Draper-Roper let-off will produce more even goods 
than any other in the market, and our high-roll take-up principle 
will also assist in keeping the width uniform. Of coui'se, the 
weight will vary if the take-up is not absolutely uniform 
and positive in action. Our iron take-up roll is also of 
assistance in keeping the picks uniform. Another defect, 
not always classed as a defect, is the mispick, or lack of thread 
in a shade or double thread in a shade. With ordinary two- 
harness weaving the presence or absence of threads is hardly 
apparent except on close examination. When goods are napped^ 
it is highly important that mispicks should be avoided. In 
common loom weaving the weaver is personally responsible for 
a mispick, as he can find the pick by turning the loom over and 
taking care to make a proper jointure. Some weavers escape 
mispicks on common looms by stopping the loom just before 
the filling weaves off in the shuttle. Our feeler mechanism 
copies this method by changing the filling just before it is woven 
off. It has been found that the Northrop Loom on three-shade 
weaving makes less mispicks than the common loom as run in the 
ordinary manner, for the usual lapse of time between the detec- 
tion by the fork and the operation at the hopper brings 
the new thread into the proper shade a good part of the time. 
The usual w^eaving expert has more to say about cover on 
the cloth than any other special feature. Cover is a quality 



173 



appealing to the eye by evenness and to the feel by softness. 
Evenness can be positively produced by using reeds having a 
dent for each thread and may also be apparently produced by 
weaving with the upper shed slack so that the unevenness is 
disguised. A soft feel is produced in a similar manner and can 
also be given by use of soft twisted filling. Cop filling undoubt- 
edly has advantages over bobbin filling in this respect, although 
it is possible that bobbin filling may some day be spun with 
slacker twist if desired. Slackness in shed is produced by the 
relative positions of the breast beam and whip roll, or by the 
angle of the lay when beating vtp. Heavy drop wires may take 
some of the slackness out of the top shed, but we have never 
found this objection important. Bare cloth is also due to the 
harness cams not being suitable. Sometimes cloth or warp is 
soiled by dirt falling through belt holes in the floor above. All 
mills should be thorovighly equipped with belt hole guards to 
prevent such difficulty. Sometimes oil from the shafting above 
the loom will drip on to the cloth or warp. Of course, as cloth 
is woven from yarn made in other departments, its defects may 
be due to conditions outside the weave room. If the filling yarn 
is poorly wound, rings of yarn will slip of, making double filling 
in the cloth. If not properly moistened it will kink. Yarn may 
be made from dirty roving or with too much twist. Of course, 
the slashing of the warp affects the weaving and the goods 
woven. All the departments of a mill should work harmoniously 
to produce the necessary result, and the management in charge 
oi all departments is directly responsible for such a result. 



174 

COTTOIsr MILL PEODUCTS, 1900. 

(From Census Bulletin, No. 215.) 
ARRANGED IN ORDER OF YARDS WOVEN. 



Total 

Prints and converters cloths 

Not finer than Xo. 28 warp 

Finer than No. 28 warp 

Sheetings and shirtings 

Ginghams 

Napped fabrics 

Fancy woven fabrics... 

Drills 

Twills and satteens 

Ticks, denims and stripes 

Duck, total 

Duck, sail 

Duck, other 

Upholstery goods 

Mosquito and other netting 

Bags and bagging 

Cottonades 

Corduroy, cotton, velvet and plush 

Yarns, sewing cotton twine, tape, 
and other products 

Total value of all products, in- 
cluding above 



■c 


6 




t« 


Square Yai 


- be 

-&! 

o i; 

Oh 


3 
> 


■si 
1^ 


4,509,750,616 


100 


$243,218,155 


450,682 


1,581,613,827 


36 


57,780,940 


125,000* 


1,056,278,952 




35,616,575 




525,334,875 




22,164,365 




1,212,403,048 


27 


55,513,032 


100,000 


278,392,708 


6 


16,179,200 


25,000* 


268,852,716 


6 


18,231,044 


44,227* 


237,841,603 


5 


21,066,310 


45,686 


237,206,549 


5 


11,862,794 


30,000* 


235,860,518 





14,301,302 


28,839* 


171,800,853 


4 


16,446,633 


18,000* 


129,234,076 


3 


14,263,008 


15,000* 


11,750,151 




2,216,371 




117,483,925 




12,046,637 




50,334.609 


1 


8,670,384 


5,000* 


41,885,023 


1 


875,868 


4,500* 


30,039,616 




2,554,192 


4,421 


26,323,947 




2,791,431 


2,500* 


7,961,523 




2,682,017 


800* 






89,588,001 


1,709 






332,806,156 





Estimated by writer. (The report only separates out the looms on certain lines.) 



In referring to the goods which it is now possible to weave 
on the Northrop looms, it might be simpler to mention those 
which can not be woven, for the Northrop loom has been suc- 
cessfully used on the greater majority. We weave all classes of 
prints, sheetings and shirting, a large line of napped fabrics, 
drills, twills and satteens, ticks, denims and striped goods; in 
fact practically the whole field covered by looms that weave 
with one shuttle, no matter whether they use plain harness 



^75 



motions, dobbies or jacquards. Our looms have been specially 
successful on corduroys. They are also weaving bags, window 
shade cloth, towels, etc, Qiiite a number of mills are using our 
regular loom on goods made with silk warp and cotton filling. 
We have woven worsted goods by using a wooden skewer to 
hold the ordinary worsted bobbin. We see no I'eason why the 
Northrop principle should be restricted to cotton looms. 



"We have been runniug twenty-six of your Northrop looms for a 
little over a year and it has occurred to me that you mio-ht be interested 
in results obtained. Our percentage of seconds for tire last three 
months from these looms, for all causes, such as thin places, button 
hole selvedges, oil cords in tilling, etc., is only 2.07 per cent. Goods 
weigh 2.85 yards to the pound, 18s warp, 15s filling. I believe this is a 
low figure, especially as these goods are all bleached and the bleacbery 
reports that our grading of first quality is strict so that thej^ have prac- 
tically nothing to say to us except to hold the goods up to our standard. 
Conservative figures show that the looms are producing about 93}^ per 
cent, of theoretical production figured on our actual running time. We 
do not run them over time at all, as some mills do. Some mills may 
show a larger percentage than we get, but as the goods must bear rigid 

inspection 1 think the results produced are fair The looms 

give us little if any trouble in fixing, and repair account for them is 
very light. We are running them 170 picks, which is somewhat higher 
than you recommend for 45" reed space looms, but they give us no 
trouble in that respect." — [Letter received from customer Sept. 28, 1900. 



"They say they have never had any complaint from the selling 
house in regard to the quality of their cloth, and some of the goods they 
are weaving in 6-cuts rolls, and sending it out even without inspecting 
it at the miW— [Expert's lieport of Dec. 12, 1903. 



:76 



PRICI)S AND PROFITS. 

The price demanded for a new machine sliould bear a per- 
tinent relation to the profits to be derived from its use. The 
machine itself may be absolutely efficient, accomplishing all 
that its promoters claim, and yet demand a price prohibitive by 
reason of the capital required. On the other hand-, a new^ 
machine may be sold so cheaply as to give little encouragement 
to the builders to continue its improvement, through the only 
possible channels ; namely, expensive experiment. Contrary to 
a popular fallacy, inventors rarely devote their time and energy 
entirely for the good of the vs^orld at large. Those v^^ho develop 
and introduce the inventions are certainly not so impractically 
altruistic. There is no reason why the customer should not pay 
a proper price for value received ; and yet, in the general intro- 
duction of inventions, it is necessary to give the customer the 
lion's share of profit, in order to secure his approbation. The 
value of our spindle improvements has recently been estimated 
at considerably over one hundred million dollars ; and yet the 
return in price paid for the actual spindles themselves, sold 
within the period referred to, would be under twenty million 
dollars, which payment must cover the cost of the spindles 
themselves, the cost of the patents, the cost of expensive litiga- 
tion, and all the experiments, advertising, and general expense 
connected with the industry. 

The introduction of the spindle was comparatively easy 
compared with the introduction of the loom, for the early price 
of new spinning with high speed spindles was actually less for a 
given product than the slow running frames, while with our loom 
the price is nearly three times the price of the competing loom, 
so far as the amount of product is concerned. There is always 



177 



a protest against higher prices, no matter what the advantages 
may be. 

Looking at the introducer's side, it is evident that, having 
but seventeen years of patent protection, several years of which 
are usually used up before actual sales are made, he must make 
enough out of this limited period to repay all of his expenditure 
involved in perfecting, protecting, and introducing his idea, as 
well as a fair bonus to repay for the risk of attempting to 
improve in the first place. The profits must also cover the 
expense of hundreds of useless experiments, thousands of dis- 
used patterns, possible litigation, extensive advertising, replace- 
ment by improved parts, etc. It may be easily demonstrated 
that if it had been possible to sell all the possible customers all 
the looms they could use at a uniform price, none of them would 
derive appreciable profit from the operation ; for the competi- 
tion amongst themselves would reduce the profits till the general 
public received all the advantages of the new economies. 
The earlier purchasers of our looms would, therefore, pre- 
fer to see our introduction gradual, and it would hardly be 
fair to them to reduce prices in favor of those who were not 
so willing to assist by patronage in the early years of trial. We 
have no doubt but that we could have sold a great many more 
looms, had we set our price lower in the first place. We might 
even have made as much profit ; perhaps even more. It would 
have been necessary, however, to have still further enlarged our 
plant for such a purpose, and after filling the more numerous 
orders given to replace old machinery, v^e might easily have 
found ourselves over equipped for the regular business of 
supplying new mills for the future. 

The possible profits of the Northrop loom are based on the 
actual fact that with them a weaver can produce at least twice as 
much cloth as formerly, often three times as much, and in special 
instances even more, by tending a much greater number of 



178 



looms. It is also found that the Northrop looms will produce more 
cloth per loom, as they generally run for a greater percentage of 
the time and in many mills are allowed to gain still more by run- 
ning during the noon hour. The quality of the cloth is often bet- 
ter for certain purposes, but we do not claim yet that the improve- 
ment in quality actually increases the price at which the cloth can 
be sold. We do believe it is enough better to give a preference 
and we believe that with certain of our later devices, employed in 

large quantity, we shall actually Create a new and 
better grade of cloth which the common loom 

does not produce. The weavers on Northrop looms, hav- 
ing actually less work to do, even while tending three times as 
many looms as formerly, have been allowed to share somewhat 
in the profits by being allowed a price per cut at which they can 
make better wages. The average piece price for goods woven 
on Northrop looms is probably a little less than half the former 
w^eaving rate. To offset this gain we have an increased cost of 
the loom itself, with loss of interest on the extra investment 
money, and a ver}^ slight increase in repairs and fixing, although 
there are mills which claim that their expenses in this line are 
actually less with the Northrop loom. Roughly figured, the 
gross profit on the loom should run from $20 per year per loom 
upward. It varies vs^ith the scale of wages paid, and the number 
of common looms formerly tended ; for instance, Northrop loom 
weavers are paid six cents per cut in Southern mills on goods 
■where they might earn nine cents in the North. The weaver 
that changes from four common looms to twelve Northrop will 
show a greater gain than one who changes from eight to twenty. 
There are many incidental advantages in the lessening of the 
number of operatives required. When ^ve take half the help 
out of the main department of a mill we greatl}^ lessen the num- 
ber of tenements necessary, lessen the cost of bookkeeping and 
paying off, and less personal attention is required from the 



179 

supervisors. Our loom being automatic in character, requires 
much less skill and training from the operative, for it is easy to 
learn to run Northrop looms ; in fact, green help become accom- 
plished weavers in a much shorter period than vs^ith common 
looms. As the loom is automatic and therefore more responsi- 
ble for errors, there is less chance for trouble w^ith the weavers 
over bad work and fines. Some of these matters may seem 
small in themselves, but they amount to considerable in the 
aggregate . 

We have labored very hard to overcome traditions in weav- 
ing that have grown up out of the long ascendency of the common 
loom, and we believe that the possibilities of automatic weaving 
are still hampered by customs originating with common loom 
practice. When a weaver was limited to four, six or eight 
looms, it was more or less a matter of pride to keep them run- 
ning, and if the weaver could not keep a certain number con- 
tinuously operating he was forced to use a less number. This 
bred the instinctive horror of a stopped loom, which prevails 
now that the Northrop loom allows a much greater number to 
the operator ; yet economy actually demands that a weaver with 
automatic looms should have enough under his charge so that 
some stopped looms would be more or less of a necessity. It is 
quite common in Northrop loom weaving to have production 
run as high as 95 per cent, of the possible production without 
counting in the extra gain by running noon hours. It is a com- 
mon thing to see a Northrop loom weaver with all of the hop- 
pers full and no single loom stopped for any purpose. Such a 
state of affairs simply proves that the same weaver could be 
given a greater number of looms if it would be possible to 
educate him into a state of mind that would not look on the 
stopping of several looms at a time as a terrible error. It can be 
easily proved that it would be much more economical for weav- 
ers to get 80 per cent, off of 30 looms rather than 90 per cent, off 



I So 



of 20 looms, or 95 per cent, off of 16 looms, provided the pay 
of the weaver v\^ere regulated to the product in proper propor- 
tion. We believe it for the best interests of the loom, the help 
and the management as well, for the Northrop loom weavers to 
be relieved of the work of cleaning and oiling their looms. 

No labor-saving device attains its full efficiency in the first 
few years of use. Our later large hopper looms have certainly 
enlarged the scope of the weaver, and continual improvement 
will gradually reduce warp breakage and other loom stops due 
to various other causes. 

The problem of how to increase earnings is often solved by 
enlarging the plant, but less money applied to the improvement 
of a present plant may sometimes give far greater returns with 
much less inconvenience. The change from common to North- 
rop looms requires no addition to floor space. As aboVe noted, 
it greatly decreases the number of operatives, and therefore 
solves a most perplexing problem in localities where weavers 
are scarce. If the old mills will not appreciate these facts 
they must face the competition of the new mills, which 
start with more modern equipment. We are frank to say 
that the hesitation of many of the older mills has been 
distinctly disappointing, for we should like to see them share 
in the benefits of our new ideas on account of the friend- 
ship founded on long and intimate associations. Failing to 
induce them to take the majority of our products, however, 
we must in justice to ourselves encourage the building of new 
plants. We should, if necessary, place our looms, even if we 
had to build and operate mills ourselves in which they were 
used ; for we are absolutely convinced that the mills with our 
machinery can make profits in straight competitive lines at prices 
which will drive the older, poorly equipped mills, out of busi- 
ness. If there is demand enough to make a profit for all, the 
mills with our machinery will make the greater part of it ; and 



when there is no profit at all for the older mill, the newer mills 
can at least keep a balance on the right side of the ledger. 

According to the census reports there were in 1900 about 
450,000 cotton looms running in this country alone. In 1904 
there are certainly over 500,000. Out of this number there are 
probably at least 75,000 looms running on tapes or narrow wares 
and with box motions or other devices that practically take them 
out of the field of filling changing mechanisms. These looms, 
however, offer an opportunity for warp stop-motions which we 
have already accepted to a considerable extent. Taking out the 
Northrop looms already delivered and running, there remains a 
field of about 330,000 looms for us to replace, as this number of 
common looms is still used on goods which we are perfectly 
capable of weaving. With our present plant, even before 
recent additions, we attained an output of 2,000 looms per 
month. With our new foundry facilities and a proper increase 
in tools for which we have space already saved, we could 
undoubtedly deliver 40,000 looms a year. In view of the looms 
sold to new mills it is therefore somewhat doubtful as to whether 
we could entirely replace the old looms in 10 years' time, espe- 
cially as we should be foolish to increase our capacity to an 
extent not warranted by the normal future demand after the old 
looms ai-e replaced. The trade can therefore be assured that 
those who have purchased looms now will have at least 10 years' 
advantage over those who delay. The eai'lier purchasers of our 
looms have long since paid for them by their profits, and these 
profits are practically guaranteed so long as there remains any 
appreciable number of common looms in use. 

During the last few years the trade has noticed many peri- 
ods of curtailment by large numbers of mills running on certain 
standard lines of goods. It has also been noticed that other 
mills on these lines of goods have not only run full time, but 
even kept running during the night hours in spite of the disad- 



vantages of such a practice. The main difference "be- 
tween these mills has been that one class run 
common looms and the other Northrop looms. 

It is not to be supposed that the introduction of a revoki- 
tionary machine like the Northrop loom is effected without diffi- 
culty, annoyance and delay. Those who use common looms and 
have not immediate chance for replacing them are naturally 
anxious that their competitors should not adopt advantageous 
improvements. Those who sell common looms are adverse to 
acknowledge the merits of their competitors and the influence 
of a large body of manufacturers with their salesmen and per- 
sonal friends is of acknowledged weight and importance. There 
is also a limited class who have made unsuccessful experiments 
with certain lines of weaving with the new devices and who are 
not disposed to admit that the other mills can be more successful 
than themselves. All of these opposing elements together create 
a certain atmosphere of doubt and a disinclination to accept facts, 
which can only react to their own disadvantage. 

Apart from the profit derived from the sale of our looms 
there is a distinct jDcrsonal satisfaction in overcoming the 
antagonism of these varied elements and proving the truth of our 
earliest contentions. It has always been held to be a difficult 
matter to convince a man against his will, but difficulties in the 
undertaking make success so much the sweeter. 

Many have read the series of letters that were written to the 
Manchester Guardian by their special correspondent who visited 
this country with the delegation that inspected our cotton industry. 
Nothing i-ecently published gives an equally clear and compre- 
hensive view of the trade situation from North to South by an 
outside, and thei-efore unprejudiced, party. The following 
quotation is but one of many which refer to the paramount 
advantages of our loom : 

" The mill contains, at present, 25,000 ring spindles and 800 ISTor- 
throp looms. All the cloth manufactured is for export, and consists of 



1^3 



two kinds ouly, namely — China drills and sheetings or shirtings. Drills 
are 30 inches wide, weigh 3 yards to the pound, and have 68 ends and 48 
picks to the inch. The sheetings are 36 inches wide, are of the same 
weight as the drills, and have 48 ends and 48 picks to the inch. In both 
cases the yarns are 13.65s twist and 13.80s weft, the cuts are 120 yards 
long, and the piece rate for weaving is 13 cents a cut. The rate for 
weaving similar drills in JNIaine, I had found but a few days before, to 
be 58 1-2 cents for 120 yards, and that was less than the Lancashire rate. 
Here, the cheapness of the Southern labor and the use of the Northrop 
loom had enabled the superintendent to undercut the Maine weaving 
price by 75 per cent. One man who was running 24 looms told me that 
he could earn .$1.35 per day; two other men were also running 24 looms 
each, and said they could make .$1.50, . . . the tackier s tend 100 
looms each." 

The w^riter also refers to a statement made to him in Massa- 
chusetts to the effect that the Northrop loom is so easily managed 
that an inexperienced girl learned to run 14 of them within a 
week. 

It is not often that a manufacturer -will personally admit the 
extent of his profits by use of the Northrop loom. Recently, 
however, it became necessary for such a manufacturer to file an 
affidavit, which, being a matter of public record, we quote in 
part, although witholding the name for the present. In referring 
to a large number of looms running with Northrop attachments^ 
the affidavit states as follows : • 

" This mill is one of the most modern in this country so far as equip- 
ment is concei-ned. The average pay of the weavers who attend to these 
looms (common) that weave such goods is nine dollars a week. Each 
weaver takes care of four looms. The average production of each of 
these looms is twenty-four yards or twelve pounds of such goods per 
day. This would be one hundred and forty-four yards or seventy-two 
pounds per loom a week, making five hundred and seventy-six yards or 
two hundred and eighty-eight pounds of such goods a week for the four 
looms taken care of by each weaver. This is the only mill of which I 
have knowledge where the weaver can take care on an average of as 
many as four looms." (On this style of goods.) 

" The cost of manufacture of such goods for the wages of the 
weaver only is about 3.12 cents per pound. With less improved looms 
for producing such goods, of which many are in use, the cost is greater 
as a weaver cannot take caj-e of so many looms." 

The affidavit then states that the use of our devices on these 
goods increases the production to 38 yards per loom, or 19 pounds 
of such goods a day. As a weaver attends six looms of the new 



[84 



style, the production per day per weaver is 228 yards, or 114 
pounds of such goods. The cost per pound is about 1.31 cents, 
or a saving per loom per year of over $100 each. The affidavit 
states that the profits from such looms will be about 9 per cent, 
on the entire cost of the plant, including carding and spinning 
machinery, and if the plant were to consist solely of looms, the 
saving would pay a dividend of about 19 per cent, on the 
cost. The affidavit also calls attention to the greater product 
per loom as requiring less looms, less floor space, etc. In fact 
100 looms at this ratio of product would do the work of 158 
common looms. On this basis the saving in number of looms 
and floor space would possibly pay for the entire cost of the 
attachments, as these are one of the most expensive type of 
loom built. 

Of course, it is evident that this is a pecular class of -weav- 
ing, inasmuch as the weaver only changes from four looms to 
six ; yet the greatly increased product shows that the weavers on 
six looms are producing more than twice as much cloth per 
weaver compared with the common loom product. This affidavit 
was not made with the intent of aiding us in any way by its 
information ; in fact, we only ran across it by accident. 

We recently learned from an Indian cotton manufacturer, 
now in this country, that in India his weavers I'un two looms 
each and earn $7-5o per month. This seems a very low price, 
but as a matter of fact it is $3-25 per loom per month, or $39 
per loom per year. There are plenty of Northrop loom mills in 
the United States where the wages are under $20 per loom per 
year, although the American weaver may be earning five times 
as much money. Of course, it is probable that Northrop looms 
may invade India itself and the coolie may run four, or eight, or 
sixteen, instead of two common looms. Theoretically, all manu- 
facturing could be done cheaper in such countries as China and 
India — but practically the high wage countries hold their own. 



i85 



Yet the only reason they do hold their own is because they take 
prompt advantage of economical methods and devices. The 
mills that defer using Northrop looms until India is equipped, 
will have to face a serious proposition. But why should they 
wait? 

We were recently permitted to see a record from the books 
of a lai-ge Northern mill using both Northrop and common looms. 
The figures were based on a low scale of weaving wages for the 
common loom. The figures shov\^ed an actual difference of 
$23.52 per loom per year in favor of the Northrop loom above 
all extra expense for supplies, fixing, cleaning, etc. The 
weavers on the Northrop loom also earned $55. 12 each, per year, 
above the earnings of the common loom weavers. This record 
is based on sixteen Northrop looms to the weaver. Some mills 
already run twenty-six Northrop looms to the weaver. 

Recently noting a broker's list of Southern cotton mill 
stocks for sale, w^ith prices bid and asked, the w^riter, as a matter 
of curiosity, separated out the mills which had bought Northrop 
looms, and figured a comparison in the value of the stock as 
quoted. The price asked wsi& taken in each case, the price bid 
being added in only where there was no asking price. The total 
result showed that 28 mills without Northrop looms averaged a 
stock value, as thus figured, of $102 a share. The 37 other 
mills, having Northrop looms, averaged on the same basis, $114 
per share. 

Prices of looms vary somewhat with cost of materials and 
equipment desired. They should properly vary in proportion to 
the expense and utility of new attachments. We do not, how- 
ever, add to the price of our loom when improving its funda- 
mental features. It has been estimated that we have actually 
added $15 of cost per loom to our complete machine since its 
earlier stages. We are glad to estimate on whatever looms 



are desired and specified. Old common looms are taken in 
exchange at fair allowance under certain conditions. 

Our policy of smashing up old common looms taken as part 
payment for new NorthrojD looms has a^vakened a certain amount 
of comment, the visiting Englishmen being particularly im- 
pressed. Of course, some of these old looms have outrun their 
utility and are fit only for junk in any event. Many looms thus 
replaced, however, have been comparatively new and certainly 
efficient so far as common looms may be efficient. 

One of the frequent English visitors to our country pub- 
lished a comparative criticism of the Northrop loom on his 
return home, that endeavored to show how^ little actual saving 
was possible. In view of the vs^ide circulation of the article, as 
copied by various trade journals, we thought best to issue an 
answer at some length, taking up the various comparisons in 
detail and explaining the falsities on which the final figures were 
based. We were rather embarrassed in replying by the fact 
that while the Northrop loom mill was well known to all, the 
common loom mill selected by comparison v\^as not named, and 
the assertions of speeds, w^ages, etc., relating to that mill, could 
not be verified. Without repeating our argument, we might say 
that we found several reasons to criticise the assumptions made, 
and if any expert w^ho cares to venture further in this line will 
give us detailed information as to the source of his facts, we 
w^ill be glad to enter into a further discission. The comparison 
of one mill in one definite locality, with another mill several 
hundred miles away, is not necessarily convincing. The best 
comparison possible is that of Northrop looms and common 
looms running in the same mill, under the same conditions. 
Our best customers include the mills that have made this experi- 
ment for themselves, and we are ready to contend that these 
mills are perfectly capable of figuring cost and appreciating 
conditions. 



i87 



"How the introduction of this new loom affects the cost of labor 
may be shown by a comparison of two accounts of the cost of labor in 
print cloth, one taken by myself from a mill account of older date, but 
from one of the best mills in New England, and the other from the 
workings of recent date, received from a mill but a few days ago. 

COST OF LABOR IN ONE POUND OF PRINT CLOTH. 

(28 inches, 64x64, seven yards to the pound.) 



ITEMS. 



Carding 

Spinning 

Preparing for loom 

Weaving 

Other labor expenses 

Total labor cost 

Difference on account of improved loom 
All other differences 



1887. 
Cents. 



0.8.55 
1.137 
0.697 

2.8 
0.239 



5.728 



1898. 
Cents. 



0.7 
1.1 
0.7 
1.6 
0.25 



4.35 



Differences. 

1898. 
Cents. 



0.155 
0.037 

-0.003 
1.2 

-0.011 



1.378 
1.2 



0.178 



The items covering all other manufacturing processes are scarcely 
worth noticing. The difference is almost entirely traceable to the new 
loom 

Now, by no possibility can the strain which the North could be 
subjected to by the South be so great as the strain the Northern mill 
has to sustain from Northern mill, and the Southern mill from South- 
ern mill ; for the same causes may be found in operation in the South 
that produce the differences in the North. The differences of this pro- 
nounced type are created by the introduction of the so-called "auto- 
matic" loom. When, by this change, 50 per cent, in the weaving-cost 
can be saved, it is obvious that it will not take long to convince mill- 
owners that it is profitable to discard the loom which was satisfactory 
until very recently, and to adopt the new loom by which an expert 
weaver can turn out from two to three times as much cloth in a week." 
— [_Jacoh Schoenhof. 



"The manufacturers are perfectly willing to try any new device 
that may come out in the way of new machinery ; and no better exam- 
ple of that can be given than the fact that the automatic loom has found 
its home in the South almost exclusively, and the advantages of the 
automatic loom are, by the Southern manufacturers, deemed to be very 
much in its favor, as against the ordinary running loom. Several man- 
ufacturers said, in fact, that it was not hard to secure 973^ per cent, of 
the full possible production of the loom." — \_Mr. Mercer^ N. Y. Journal 
of Commerce. 



i88 



"GOOD WEAVING WORK.— A correspondent at Spartanburg, 
S. C, writes us that they have weavers at Spartan Mill No. 2 running 
30 Draper looms. One is a woman, and she has taken off in February 
up to the night of the 18th, 326 cuts, 51 yards to cut, which is 50 35-100 
yards per loom ; speed of loom 180, 64x64 goods, which makes 97 86-100 
of production. How is that for running Northrop Draper looms?" — 
iTextile Excelsior^ Feb. 18, 1899. 



"There can be no doubt that the enormous expansion of the Ameri- 
can cotton industry during recent years has been very largely owing to 
the Northrop loom, and the conviction is steadily gaining ground in this 
country that only by the general adoption of the Northrop loom can 
our cotton trade be put once more upon a thoroughly sound basis."— 
\_Letter from London correspondent to The Indian Textile Journal., printed 
September., 1903. 



One of the cloths made here very largely in the 40-inch looms 
is 32 inches wide and has 68 ends and 112 picks to the inch of 42's twist 
and 36's weft. It is woven in 62 yard cuts, and the price paid to the 
weavers is 27^^ cents per cut for the Northrop loom and 56 cents per 
cut for the ordinary loom. The latter is, I believe, 10 per cent, less 
than the rate paid in Lancashire, but the ordinary eight loom weaver 
here cao earn $9 a week and the weaver who runs twenty Northrop 
looms $10.50 to $11. — ^Correspondent of Manchester Guardian. 



For the 2000 Northrop looms there are 134 weavers — a number 
which I verified by counting the names in the overseer's wage-book. 
Some of the Aveavers are running 20 40-in. Northrop looms each, others 
16, and a number of learners have 12 each, the average for the whole of 
the 2000 looms being a fraction less than 15. . . . — \_C or respondent of 
Manchester Guardian. 



"Called at the Mills ; found them exceedingly pleased with 

the Northrop looms. They are getting an average of between 26 and 
27 yards per day, which is more than two yards more than they get 
from their common looms. Thej^ are weaving 78x80 goods, 40" wide, 
52 yards, and pay 20 cents a cut against 42 cents. The weavers are run- 
ning 20 looms ; there are two fixers on 204 looms, and the only extra 
help in the room is two boys for cleaning and oiling." — \_Salesman' s 
Beport, Oct. 10. 1903. 



"Their weaving is running extremely well, and they have on 1182 
looms, which they have been running an average of about 19>^ looms 

per weaver, and Mr. is sure they will be able to bring it down 

to an average of 22 looms to the weaver throughout." — ^Expert's Beport 
of Nov. 14, 1903. 



189 



"Mr. said the only fault he can find with the Northrop 

looms today is that they use too much filling. Since he came here he 
had had to put two extra spinning frames on to spinning filling for 
these looms, and now he has just put on the third." 

(In another mill). "Mr. ,the overseer of weaving, says they 

are getting 93 per cent, product from the Northrop looms, 26 looms to "a 
weaver, 163 picks per minute." — {^Extract from ExperVs Beport, Dec. 12, 
1903. 



"The work at this mill is running very nicely indeed. They now 
have some weavers running 30 looms each, and with all their looms 
running — 1292 I understand — they have only 59 weavers at the present 
time, and expect to spread the weavers farther the coming week." — 
[From Expert's Beport of Jan. 16, 1904. 



"The weavers are still running 20 looms each here, but it is hardly 
enough for them. There was less than 5 per cent, of the looms stopped, 
and the overseer thought I had made a mistake in count, as he said he 
was weaving 98 per cent, right along." — IFrom Expert's Beport of March 
26, 1904. 



"On their print looms, the weavers are running from 16 to 28 
looms. Most of the weavers, however, are running 20, 24, and 26. 
They pay for weaving 51^ cents j^er cut of 52 yards."— [i'j'om Expert's 
Report of April 16, 1904. 



"In No. 1 mill I saw one room with 216 looms in it being run by six 
weavers. These weavers run 36 looms each, cotton harness and double- 
thread stop-motion. The goods are 80x88 25s warp 33s filling. Four 
boys fill the batteries for tliis room, and they are getting as much pro- 
duct as when the weavers ran 24 looms each and filled their own bat- 
teries. The overseer says he expects to get a larger product than 
before. The weavers like this arrangement better than the former one. 
The overseer told me that the weavers tell him that filling the batteries 
is more than half of their work." — \_Expert''s Beport., April., 1904. 



"They have an average of about 18 looms to the weaver, and are 
making prints 64x60, paying Q\i cents a cut for 54 yards."— [i?'ro??i 
Expert's Beport of May 7, 1904. 



190 



In order that this volume shall be complete, we refer again 
to the change in price of our Northrop loom shuttles. On 
December i, 1903, we sent a letter to all of our loom customers, 
stating that while our former charge was $1 each for new shut- 
tles sold for repairs, with an allowance of 35 cents for equal 
number of old shuttles returned, customer paying freight, our 
standard price from the above date would be 75 cents each, we 
no longer asking for any old shuttles to be returned, leaving the 
mill to use parts of old shuttles for their own repairs when 
advisable, no allowance whatever to be made in future for old 
parts, as we do not care to have them returned to us. When 
our original allowance of 35 cents was first voted, we expected 
to use such good parts as were sei-viceable in the old shuttles, 
but finding such repairing inadvisable, we sent out regular new 
shuttles on such orders. Our customers were put to consider- 
able annoyance and expense in saving the old shuttles, and pay- 
ing boxing and freight charges. We believe our new arrange- 
ment will be much more satisfactory to all parties concerned. 

Although our shuttle is made under some of our most 
important patents, the new price only gives us a small manufac- 
turer's profit, without royalty charge. Our shuttles are much 
more expensive than the common loom shuttles, and our meth- 
ods of manufacture include a high standard of care and pre- 
cision. 




"Mr. said the last time the treasurer was there he wanted to 

go ill and see the Xortlirop looms. Every loom was running and the 
weavers sitting down. The treasurer said' that was enough, he did not 
care to see the rest of the weaving. The overseer told the agent in my 
presence that it is hard work to get weavers foi- his common looms, as 
they all want the Xorthrop." — [From Expert's Beport of 3Iarch 26, 1904. 



191 



THM LABOR QVnSTION. 

While there have been a few cases of labor difficulty in 
adjusting the new conditions introduced by our Northrop looms, 
they have really been most surprisingly infrequent, considering 
the radical changes introduced. A mill that changes from com- 
mon to Northrop looms necessarily discharges half its weaving 
force, but the scarcity of good weavers is proverbial and the 
surplus thus produced is easily assimilated. In the adjustment 
of wages to the new conditions disputes have not prevented the 
further adoption of our looms, or reduced its advantages to a 
minimum. The general policy followed by the purchasers 
of our looms has been to allow weavers to earn more pay 
in tending them than they formerly received on the common 
looms. In many cases this extra wage has been very liberal 
indeed, considering the fact that the weavers really had less work 
to do, and a less irritating series of operations. There is no 
difficulty involved in changing from the common to the Northrop 
style of weaving. Weavers should certainly credit us with the 
relief from sucking filling, for prior to our introduction of the 
Northrop loom, it is doubtful if any appreciable per cent, of 
shuttles in use on common looms had hand-threading or self- 
threading devices. Since the advent of our loom, more hand- 
threaded shuttles have come into use, but their proportionate 
number is still quite small. The sucking of filling is naturally 
attended by many physical evils, especially where the filling is 
colored. Common loom weavers are a short-lived class, as a 
rule, their lungs becoming packed with cotton fibre inhaled 
when sucking filling. Another curious danger inherent in com- 
mon loom practice comes from the changing around of weavers 
on different sections of looms. We have heard of an actual 
case in which three weavers are said to have caught consump- 



192 



tion from using the shuttles of a consumptive weaver ; and other 
objectionable diseases are transferred by the same application 
of the lips to shuttles used by infected parties. 

More hand-threaded shuttles would undoubtely be used if the 
ordinary hand-threaded shuttle was as efficient as the closed-eye 
shuttle for general weaving. It has taken us a great many years 
to develop an efficient open eye for our own purpose, and our 
patents undoubtedly control the better forms of eye for either 
hand-threading or self-threading. We have been asked fre- 
quently to fit our eyes to common shuttles, but do not care to 
confuse our systems or encourage the retention of uneconomical 
machinery. 

The advantages of automatic weaving have raised a curious 
question, certain interested parties contending that, as there are 
labor laws restricting the hours of labor, these same laws apply 
to the machinery, so that Northrop looms should not be allowed 
to run without attention during the noon hour, or at other periods. 
The mill managements naturally claim that it is immaterial 
whether automatic machinerv runs overtime or not if no help is 
in attendance. The opposition might as pertinently object to 
the continuous operation of the solar system. It is inter- 
esting to note that the very antagonism directed against the 
Northrop loom is a sure evidence of its superiority. The very 

fact that it does procliice cloth with economy of 

labor, suggests the mistaken notion that it is therefore worthy 
of opposition by the laborers themselves. As a matter of fact, 
however, there are more weavers given employment to-day than 
there were before the Northrop loom was introduced. The 
introduction of a labor-saving machine is so gradual, of necessity, 
that it rarely causes any real commotion and change of immedi- 
ate conditions. In progress there must be continual readjust- 
ments. It is only in countries like China, that do not progress, 
that conditions are stable. 



'93 



The general question of labor displacement by automatic 

machinery is so well considered in the following extract that we 

take pleasure in its reproduction : 

"But our problem in this nation is of to-day, and if we do our duty 
of to-day the nation will find those who can take our places to-morrow. 
All that is now happening is in accord with the natuie of things. Dis- 
placing the old with the new is never without its complications and 
minor evils, which correct themselves in due time. All good progress, 
even that which is undoubted, has its temporary sorrows. One exam- 
jjle, which takes innumerable forms, of this temporary sorrow which 
n)ay be employed to illustrate the idea, is the invention and use of labor- 
saving machinery. Upon such invention and use depends the whole 
material progress of the world. Nothing else could give us the abund- 
ance which characterizes our age. Yet, when any new labor-saving- 
invention comes into use the first thing it does is to deserve its name by 
lessening the number of men who can work. Labor saved is, tempoi-a- 
rily, labor lost. Men are discharged ; the machine does what thej^ used 
to do. Do you wonder, then, that men should resent this intrusion 
upon their sustenance and support? Some are too old to learn new 
trades, and tor them there is no consolation. Yet, in the long run, 
new occasions spring up which employ this discharged labor, and the 
world has all it used to have and much beside.— [27i!oto«s B. Beed. 



An overseer recently called attention to a Northrop loom 
weaver, saying: — "You see that woman! She has gained forty 
pounds since going on those looms and her last winter's clothes 
won't fit her." Investigation showed that she formerly ran four 
common looms (No. 4s filling, 17 warp) and now ran twelve 
Northrop on the same goods. She was making better wages 
with less work, though ascribing some of the betterment in 
health to relief from suckinsf filling-. 



"Mr. told me that at first they had a great deal of trouble 

with their weavers, but he cleaned them all out and started in with a 
new set that never saw a loom before. Now he has no trouble at all." 

— [Extract from Report of Travelling Expert, Nov. 15, 1902. 



194 




We print above a photo of a ticket of membership in one of 
the old Scotch Weaving Guilds. It dates back to the days of 
the hand loom and its owner very probably lived through the 
period when the power loom started its slow and halting prog- 
ress. The original was kindly furnished us by Mr. Elias Rich- 
ards of the Maginnis Mills, New Orleans. 



195 



One of the very best overseers of weaving in the country 
running Northrop looms made a casual observation to one of 
our representatives recently, which impresses us as being import- 
ant. We quote from the report of our representative : 

"I spent considerable time in going througli the looms that have 
been running the longest, and find them running as well, if not better, 
than ever before. The overseer tells me they are getting about 94 per 
cent, of the product, and his help is all family help. He also stated 
that if one of his weavers goes away to work on the common loom he 
is not gone more than a month before he wants to get back. 1 find this 
to be so in other places also. Once let a good weaver get used to North- 
rop looms and he never wants to run common looms again." 



"Of course, if the weaver refuses to mind more than eight looms, 
then there is not a saving but a loss by introducing them, because they 
cost very much more than the old ones. If the laborers persist in this, 
they, of course, will succeed in doing one of two things, either stop the 
improvement and therefore prevent the development of the only method 
New England has of successfully competing with the South, thus per- 
manently forcing New England into the position of a defeated industry, 
or else — what is even worse — force the introduction of an inferior pop- 
ulation that will work for less wages and use the new looms too."— 
IGeorr/e Clinton. 



We are properly proud of the high grade and splendid 
efficiency of American laborers, but we must not forget that 
other races are awakening under the stimulus of American 
examples. Some years ago we sent several hundred Northrop 
looms to Japan. They were shipped in pieces and put together 
by Japanese, we not even sending one man to supervise the job. 
One of the purchasers wrote us that they were giving "satisfac- 
tion in every respect." 



[96 



ATTEMPTS AT COMPnXITION. 

It is clearly in evidence that we are the only concern that 
has ever successfnlly introduced filling-changing looms. When 
we say "success," we do not intend to permit reference to the 
sale of small lots of automatic looms which are tried in various 
mills, with trained mechanics standing over them, the whole 
number in use after years of effort not equalling that sometimes 
shipped from our plant as a week's production. Under this 
head of filling-changing looms, we are perfectly willing to 
include the shuttle-changing devices on which so much expense 
and energy have been exhausted. We know something about 
shuttle-changing looms, for we spent considerable time in test- 
ing them ourselves. The experience of many inventors has 
practically demonstrated the fact that the shuttle-changing prin- 
ciple is fundamentally wrong. The shuttle, which is a scjuare, 
wooden box, cannot be shifted into position in a complicated 
receptacle in the short time allowed for the change, without 
chance for breakage, especially when the necessity for ejecting 
the spent shuttle is present. A large nimiber of shuttles cannot 
remain uniform in weight and width so thev will pick uniformly. 
The shuttle-changer primarily does not save enough of the 
weavers' labor, for they must still go through the motions of 
taking out the spent filling carriers, putting in new ones, and 
threading the shuttles. The difficulty of substituting one shuttle 
for another is emphasized by the confessions of the patents taken 
ovit, which allow" for a slowing up of speed while making the 
transfer. These motions often stop the weaving part of the 
loom absolutely while the transfer is being made. To say 
nothing of the loss of time which this process necessitates, it is 
evident that a weaver must be continually annoyed by the stop- 
ping of looms for this purpose ; for looms naturally only stop 



197 

for faults, and the first thought of the weaver naturally concludes 
that a fault is present. 

There is no comparison whatever as to simplicity. A 
Northrop loom, with its revolving hopper and filling-fork 
connection, using one shuttle, must be far easier to understand 
and keep in order than a complicated arrangement of shifting 
shuttle boxes, many shuttles, and intermittent cam movements. 

The persistent attempts at perfecting the shuttle-changing 
principle are surprisingly itniform in their claims, and a review 
of recent trade literature in this line might prove of interest. 
Since our last catalogue on the Northrop loom was issued in 
1900, articles have appeared in print from which the following 
brief quotations are made : 

''THE AMERICAN LOOM COMFANV. 



The Company to Build the Harriman Loom. 



This Company, recently organized, embraces all of the patents of 
the Universal Loom Company, and also all the property and business of 
the Eeadville Machine Works, at Eeadville, Mass. The new company 
will own all the patents of H. I. Harriman for the new automatic 
shuttle changing looms now being built by the Eeadville Machine 

Works The advantages of the Harriman loom over all 

other looms are high weaving speed and low magazine speed, simplicity 
and strength of construction, cheapness of supplies and line cxuality of 
cloth.'' — [Jonrnal of Commerce, March 10, 1900. 



"SELF-CHANGING SHUTTLE LOOM. 



Mr. H. E. Eoss, Durham Street Mills, Belfast."' 



The inventor has the loom working at the Durham Street Mills, in 
Belfast, where he invites inspection from persons desiring further 
infoi-mation regarding it. . . ." — \_From the Textile Mercury, June 
9, 1900. 



198 



"ATHERTOX BOOM 



Many Inspected the Busy Machine Shop 



That Turns Out the Perham Loom 



An Increasing Demand for This New Invention 



As tlie reporter approached the plant he met a local real estate 
dealer, who had been conducting two business acquaintances over the 
Perham loom, and said it was bound to be in demand in every cotton 
mill in the country. 

" I look to see a big demand for this loom, for the simple reason 
that once it is installed in a mill, competition will compel other manu- 
facturers to place them in their mills." — [Fivm the Lowell iSun, May 14, 
1901. 



" Two English inventions are now attracting attention, that of 
Messrs. Hattersley, of Keighley, and that of Mr. Bernard Crossley, of 
Burnley, in Lancashire." — \_From English paper, Oct. 21, 1901. 



"I do not know when I shall come to the end of the new self-shut- 
tling looms which are being pushed forward, for since wilting last two 
or three new ones have come to light. One is being made on commis- 
sion by Mather and Piatt of Salford. . . ." — \_Correspondent to Tex- 
tile Alamifacturers' Journal of England^ A/ay 17, 1902. 



"Other automatic looms ai'e the Crossley, Hattersley, the Boss 
loom (which is of a circular-box type), and Messrs. Harling and 
Starkie's. A week or two ago I saw two of the last-named looms 
working at Livingstone Mill, Burnlej^-laue, Burnley. . • ," — [From 
Northern Daily Telegraph, Aug. 11, 1902. 



" Recently, a new automatic loom — or, rather an attachment which 
converts the ordinary loom into an automatic loom — was shown to a 
number of pressmen at Messrs. AVilliam Dickson & Son's Phoenix Iron 
Works, Bank Top, Blackburn, by the patentees, Messrs. Rossetter and 
Talbot." — [Quoted from English journal hii '•^Southern Manufacturer,'' Oct. 
15, 1902. 



"... the following English firms all hold patents and make 
automatic looms: Messrs. Hattersley, of Keighley; Sowden & Sons, 
and George Hodgson, Ltd., Bradford; Hutchinson, Hollingworth & 



[99 



Co., Ltd., Dobcross; Robert Hall & Sons, Ltd., and William Hacking, 
of Bury; Butterwortli and Dickenson, Dugdales, and Harling & 
Todd, of Burnley: William Dickenson & Sons,"aud Willan & Mills (the 
Blackburn Loom & Weaving Machinery Co., Ltd.), Blackburn; Ather- 
ton Bros., and Gregsou & Monk, of Preston, and others. 

This list clearly indicates that English loom makers do not intend 
to be behind in the race, and as all of the devices made by them deal 
with the automatic supply of charged shuttles in contradistinction to 
the automatic supply of cops to a common shuttle, we are likely to see 
some interesting developments ere long." — [From English letter to 
American Wool d~ Cotton Beporter^ Dec. 4, 1902. 



"A EADCLIFFE INVENTOE. 



The Latest Automatic Loom. 



Mr. James Cowburn of Parrin-lane, Mouton, has invented certain 
attachments applicable to existing looms, which textile experts agree, 
have all the essentials of successful automatic shuttling. . . ." 
— [From Bury Gazette., Maij 23, 1903. 



"An appliance, which has just been invented by Mr. Harry C. 
Howarth, a member of the firm who OAvn Meadow Mills, at Failsworth, 
is being very highly spoken of in textile cii-cles in Lancashire, and 
manufacturers who have been wanting an automatic shuttle-changing 
loom, which would cheapen the cost of production and make perfect 
textile goods, will be inclined to acknowledge. . . ." — \_From The 
Textile Journal^ Aug. 7, 1903. 



" Shuttle-changers are built upon most diverse lines. . . . Others 
eject a spent shuttle and insert a full one without any reduction of 
speed. These include the Crossley No. 1, the Eoss, the Baker-Kip, the 
Cowburn, the Walker, the Gregson and Monk, the Harling and Todd, 
the_ Manchester automatic and many other looms." — [I'. W. Fox in 
Manchester Guardian., Dec. 3, 1903. 



These continuous references are certainly worthy of careful 
study when the associating facts are disclosed. In spite of all 
this flow of human energy and waste of brain tissue, the number 
of shuttle-changing looms in actual operation is probably under 
one per cent, of our total output, and the greater part of this 
number are new looms on trial that will probably be discarded 
like all that have gone before. 



200 



LONG BOBBIN EXPERIMENTS. 

Certain mills are making an interesting trial of warp stop- 
motions on common looms used in connection with longer bob- 
bins in their shuttles. 

In the more noticeable efforts in this line, the traverse on 
the filling bobbin has been increased from 5 1-3 to 8 inches, the 
looms being reduced also in speed. The change to the long 
bobbin necessarily requires changes in the spinning room, if the 
best results are to be obtained, and the spinning must be done at 
a greater inconvenience, if not expense, for no spinner will 
claim that the spinning of filling yarn on a traverse 8-inch 
length is as easy or as cheap as on a length of 5 1-2 inches. 
With this change, there is evidently 21-2 more inches of yarn 
on the bobbin, or less than 50 per cent, increase. It is abso- 
lutely impossible, therefore, for such a bobbin to run twice as 
long, as many claim, unless the loom is run at a less proportion 
of time, or less speed, or both combined, sufficiently to account 
for the result. 

Now suppose we assume for easy figuring, that the new 
bobbins will hold 50 per cent, more yarn, and suppose we com- 
pare with the former common loom conditions. A weaver with 
eight common looms on prints, or similar goods, will have a 
duty at least once per minute. That is, the replenishing of fill- 
ing, or filling breakage, mending of warp and taking off cloth, 
will make about 600 separate acts necessary per day. This 
might be sub-divided as follows : There w^ould be four opera- 
tions of taking off cloth from the eight looms, as it is common 
practice to wait until two cuts have been wound up before 
removal. The eight looms might stop about 28 times for 
broken filling in the shuttle; that is 3 1-3 times per loom, and 
would need 480 replenishments of filling, or 60 per loom. As 



20I 



to the warp breakage, it would amount to ii per loom per day 
at a very moderate estimate, making 75 duties per loom or 600 
for the eight looms, as before noted. Now, if the long bobbin 
looms were run at the same speed and with the same production, 
we would have 33 1-3 per cent, less replenishment of filling, or 
40 per loom in all. There would certainly be as many filling 
breaks, or 3 r-3 per loom, as much cloth removal, or one-half 
operation per loom, and as many warp breaks, or 55 operations 
per loom in all. If 600 operations shall still constitute a day's 
work, this weaver could run 11 looms, and no more. Now, 
suppose the looms are run so as to average twice as long for the 
filling to run, we shall produce 35 per cent, less in cloth. At 
this rate, we should have 30 replacements of filling, about 3 
duties for broken filling and cloth removal, and eight warp 
breaks or 41 per loom in all. Divide this into 600, and we find 
the possible number of looms run nearly 14 1-2 ; but these looms 
are producing but 75 per cent, of what the other looms figure, 
so that the appai'ent increase is practically cancelled. When we 
hear, therefore, of weavers tending 16 looms with large bobbins 
and warp stop-motions, we know that they are either losing in 
production, or doing more work. There is no escape from this, 
— no possible evasion of the plain facts. It may be possible to 
get more work out of a weaver temporarily than before, with- 
out proportionate increase of pay, but we cloubt very much 

whether such conditions will continue. 

As to comparison with the Northrop loom, it must be 
remembered that our looms do not require filling replenishment 
at regular intervals, as they will run until the hoppers are 
emptied. As there are 24 bobbins in our hoppers, it is evident 
that they need filling only 2 1-2 times a day. Add to this the 1 1 
warp breaks, as figured before, and the 1-2 operation for taking 
off cloth, and we have but 14 duties per loom per day. Allow 
that the work of filling the hopper is equivalent to several duties 



on the common loom ; 3, for instance, and we would have 19 
duties as a whole. This would show a capacity of over 30 
looms to a weaver at six hundred operations per day ; and, as a 
matter of fact, this record has been attained. We believe there 
are as many weavers capable of running 30 Northrop looms as 
there are who can run 13 common looms with the long bobbin 
and pi-oduce at the same rate per loom. 

Now there is, of course, no reason why the Northrop loom 
cannot use the large bobbin also, providing it is proved that 
there is no additional trouble, either in spinning or weaving off, 
as its adherents claim. This would take 33 1-3 per cent, of the 
labor in filling hoppers away. Very possibly, with improve- 
ments yet to be introduced, the Northrop loom weavers will be 
relieved entirely of the labor of filling hoppers, so that they 
shall do nothing but mend in warp threads and take cloth off the 
looms. Under such conditions, 50 looms per weaver may yet 
be the accepted rule on print goods. 



The recent introduction of the Northrop loom in England 
has aroused curious phases of criticism from the conservatives 
who have argued against the Northrop devices by raising objec- 
tions which are easily answered by the proof of those thousands 
of looms already running in this country. As a matter of fact, 
the possibilities of the Northrop loom in a country like England, 
where four looms has been the maximum, are much greater 
than in a country like ours, where common loom weavers have 
run as high as 10 looms. The English trade is used to certain 
practices introduced by the domination of the Trades Unions, 
who have prevented a weaver from tending more than four 



203 



looms and often demanding the assistance of a helper at that. 
Undei- these conditions the manufacturers have been forced to 
speed their looms up so that comparison with the lower speed 
recoiTi mended for the Northrop loom suggests immediate cause 
for comment. Now there is no reason why the Northrop loom 
cannot run at high speed so far as the mechanism itself is con- 
cerned. All cotton weavers know, however, that increase ol 
speed, increases the tendency toward warp bi'eakage. In auto- 
matic weaving it is desirable to minimize the faults which cause 
a loom to stop so far as possible, and it can be easily figured 
that there is more profit in spreading a weaver over a large 
number of looms run at a comparatively low speed rather than 
give a weaver less looms with more work per loom by reason of 
the extra breakage. Another curious contention from our 
English critics asserts that the Northrop looms require better 
yarn. If they stated that the Northrop loom ought to have 
better yarn it wovild be a fairer way to present the case. There 
is nothing in the mechanism of the Northrop loom itself to 
require better yarn or stronger yarn. The Northrop loom, and 
every other loom for that matter, will break warp and filling 
threads oftener if the yarn is poor. With the English system 
of four looms to a weaver it may pay the manufacturer to force 
the weaver to weave poor yarn, but considering that the good 
weaver with good yarn could easily run 20 and probably 24 
Northrop looms instead of 4 common English looms, it will be 
found that the gain is more than sufficient to compensate for any 
slight increase in the grade of cotton used. 



"For six months running on 8-oz. ticking— 3284 pieces— they have 
one cut of seconds ; 4-oz. ticking— 22,917 pieces— they have 3 cuts of 
seconds; 4i^-oz. denims— 9684 pieces— they have 36 cuts of seconds. 
These seconds were caused mostly by bad filling. The total amount of 
seconds made on the Draper looms for the six months is 11-100 of 
one per cent." — yFrom Expert's Beport of March 19, 1904. 



204 



SPEED RECOMMENDED FOR DRAPER LOOMS FOR MEDIUM 
WEIGHT GOODS. 




There is no reason why our loom cannot run at any speed 
attained by common looms of the same capacity. We never 
advocate extremes in this direction. In fact, on heavy goods 
we would consider the above table too high. 



In order to correct certain natural errors, recently published, 
it may be well to state that the Draper Company is not directly 
interested in the new corpoi'ation recently organized in England, 
as it never owned any rights in foreign loom patents. The Nor- 
throp Loom Company, organized in 1892, sold its United States 
rights to the Draper Company in 1897, but retained its outside 
business. It still retains many Foreign rights; in fact receives 
royalty from shops in Canada, France, Germany, Switzerland 
and Austria. 

The new British company is capitalized at £150,000, the 
stock being fully subscribed and the control remaining with the 
Draper family. Its headquarters are at Blackburn. The 
American directors are William F. Draper, George A. Draper, 
Eben S. Draper and Alfred M. Coates. The English directors 
are all prominent manufacturers. 



PATENT INFRINGEMENT. 

While we have been remarkably free from competition in 
our loom introduction, it is not our intention that any substantial 
infringement of our patent claims shall be allowed, even where 
the financial damage is immaterial. We have a suit now 
running in the United States Court against the American Loom 
Company, who exploit the " Harriman Loom," so called, for 
infringement of several of our earlier patents, especially those 
taken out on the shuttle-changing looms which we ourselves 
developed. Curiously enough, we were ourselves sued for 
infringement of some patents on hand-threaded shuttles, owned 
by one Henry M. Hewes. The suit was promptly decided in 
our favor, when it came to a hearing. 

In order to warn the unsuspecting from infringing our 
present patent rights, we call attention to our hundreds of 
patents, applying to nearly every motion of the loom, including 
the Filling-Changing devices, the Warp Stop-Motions, the 
Thread-Cutting devices, the Feelers, the Shuttle Position Detec- 
tors, the Shuttles, the Bobbins, the Cop Skewers, the Take-Up, 
the Shedding Motion, the Let-Off, the Filling-Fork, the Crank 
Arms, the method of making cranks, the Checks, the Beam 
Locks, the Brakes, and also other devices not mentioned, too 
numerous for detailed enumeration. While we have not 
engaged in this branch of business long enough to allow any of 
our patents to expire, we call special attention to the fact that 
expiration of earlier patents will not allow use of our attach- 
ments in their present form, and in their present utility, the 
improvements being covered by later patents of unquestioned 
validity. 

We call special attention to the fact that we have acquired 
by direct assignments patent formerly owned by Malcolm G. 



2o6 



Chace, and many patents formerly owned by William H. Baker 
and Frederic E. Kip, covering a large field of filling-changing 
devices for automatic looms, including various electrical connec- 
tions, and special adaptation of mechanism for special problems, 
particularly relating to changing of filling before exhaustion. 
This control does not include patents of Baker and Kip relative 
to w^arp-stop devices. We expect to enforce our rights over 
infringers of these various patents as fully as w^ith regard to any 
other patents owned and controlled by us. 

We also call attention to the fact that on Nov. 21, 1899, 
there issued to Joseph Coldwell and Christopher Giles Gildard 
a patent, No. 637,234, covering certain elements of warp-stop 
mechanism. On July 30, 1901, there issued a reissue of the 
above patent. No. 11,923, in which twelve additional claims 
were granted, covering the suspension of detectors from single 
threads, so that each thread is normally out of contact from the 
detectors suspended from the adjacent threads. We have 
acquired the sole and exclusive right to make, use and sell 
mechanical warp stop-motions containing the claims of said 
reissued letters patent, and are authorized and empowered to 
bring suit in the name of the patentees against any person who 
shall infringe said reissued letters patent. 



PATENT CONTROL. 

It is not wise for owners of important patents to express 
their opinion regarding priority, or importance, for the courts 
may not coincide with their judgment, and evidence may develop 
unappreciated circumstances. We think it safe to say, however. 



307 



that to James H. Northrop belongs the credit of inventing the 
original filling-changing loom and its most important original 
details. General Draper conceived the idea of combining a 
warp stop-motion v^^ith the filling-changer, and the earlier prac- 
tical devices in this line v^ere developed by Mr. Charles F. 
Roper. Our feeler devices are controlled by patents of Geoi'ge 
Otis Draper. These three distinct lines of novelty have been 
further developed by continued contributions of these same 
inventors, as will be seen by our table of inventions, and also by 
a long list of Hopedale experts, such as Mr. Edward S. Stimp- 
son and Mr. Jonas Northrop, whose entire time is devoted to 
loom improvement. Outside inventors have often given us 
valuable ideas ; the majority of which, however, have received 
considerable modification by our own inventors before being 
included in our regular loom output. 

It is, of course, our intention to so continually improve our 
loom as to prevent competition from our own inventions after 
their seventeen-year expiration. We believe the 50-loom weaver 
a coming possibility, and we intend to improve the quality of 
the goods produced as an associate feature of our loom 
introduction. 

In thus detailing our intentions with regard to the protection 
of our property, we do not wish it assumed that we take any 
"doginthemanger" position. We believe we control all the 
feasible means for making practical automatic looms, and we are 
willing and ready to accept orders for these looms, fitted for 
their intended purposes according to the best of our judgment and 
experience. We have not always been ready to furnish looms 
according to terms specified by customers, especially when they 
ask for combinations or elimination of devices which we con- 
sidered impractical for the purposes desired. We have no wish 
to see our looms run at a disadvantage, having a pride in their 
success and a reputation which we cherish. Neither have we 



208 



any intention to decry the merits of any of onr competitors' 
productions. We shall certainly point out any disadvantages 
inherent in their devices if they compete with machinery pro- 
duced by us which we consider more efficient and more 
satisfactory to the customer. 

In presenting a list of our Northrop loom patents we do 
not make it exhaustive, for the simple reason that we do 
not care to expose our control of a great number of patents 
which may not stand in our name as of record. We are 
protected by use of large numbers of patents for purposes of 
litigation, which are at present in others' direct ownership. 

Our principal inventors, however, include the following, 
having assigned to us the patents as noted in the period from 
Jan. I, iSS6, to July i, 1904: (Plain temple patents not 
included.) 



Adkins, A. B i 

Allen, W. E 4 

Ambler, G. B 2 

Armstead, M.J. i 

Arnold, C. H i 

Aumann, L. A. 3 

Austin, B. F. S 3 

Bailey, S. C. 

Bailey, W. H 

Baker, W. H 3 

Barber, W 

Barnes, L. E. 



Bartlett, E. E i 

Beardsell, A. W 3 

Benson, A. E 2 

Bevil, S. H I 

Bigelow, M. J 3 

Bolton, J. B I 

Bracken, H.W 2 

Brooks, J. C. 9 

Broomhead, VV. H i 

Brown, L. H. i 

Brunette, L i 

Burgess, R i 

Burton, J. L. 2 



209 



Chace, M. G I 

Chandler, I. W [ i 

Chapman, R. J. i 

Claus, J. A. I 

Clement, A. W. 5 

Cobb, W. C I 

Coldwell, J. I 

Collins, G. A. 1 

Conn, J. I 

Cote, H. c^ 

Cray, A. W i 

Cumnock, W. W i 

Cunniff, E 6 

Cunni££, J. V. 9 

Cutler, W. E i 

Cutting, S. B I 

Davenport, E. W 3 

Day, F. M 8 

Denney, D. W. i 

Donner, W i 

Draper, C. H. 12 

Draper, E. S. i 

Draper, G. i^.. 3 

Draper, George Otis 30 

Draper, W. F 28 

Dumont, M, I 

Durkin, D 3 

Dustin, J. F 4 

Eaton, W. G 9 

Eaves, A i 

Edmands, A. B i 

Edwards, J. C 5 



Emery, A. D. 2 

Fischer, A. C. i 

Fittz, VV. B I 

Foss, S. C I 

Foster, J. H. i 

Fowler, W. A 2 

Gendron, J. A. i 

Gildard, C. G I 

Gleason, O. i 

Goulet, J. A. G. I 

Hawley, C. T i 

Haynes, W 3 

Hinchliffe, W I 

Holdridge, O. E i 

Home, A. P. i 

Howard, C. H. i 

Hunnewell, H. T. i 

Hyde, K I 

Jamieson, R. 3 

Janelle, B. 2 

Janelle, O. 4 

Johnson, J. P i 

Jones, H i 

Jordan, H. W i 

Jordan, J i 

Joy, C. L I 

Keeley, J. W 3 

Keene, W. L. i 

Keith, J I 



Kelley, R. R :.. i 

Kerrigan, H. J. i 

Kip, F. E 34 

Kirk, J. T I 

Knox, C. I I 

Lacey, F 3 

Lacey, W i 

Lamb, J. A i 

Lane, J. J i 

Lee, B. F i 

Littlefield, C. A. _ 12 

Ludlam, J. S i 

Mahoney, D. D i 

Marcoux, A. M 3 

Mason, E. P 2 

McKay, J. L I 

McNerney, T. H i 

Mommers, R. S. 2 

Mooney, T 3 

Muldowney, J. J. 2 

Northrop, J. H 85 

Northrop, Jonas 26 

Nutting, C. E 4 

O'Connell, P. J i 

Oldfield, W I 

Oswalt, J. L I 

Owen, H. W. 2 

Parker, G. H i 

Peck, L F 2 



Phelps, L. M. I 

Piper, O. I 

Piron, V I 

Raby, Z 3 

Railton, J. 2 

Remington, H. A. i 

Rhoades, A. E 3 

Rigby, R. I 

Robinson, D i 

Robinson, E. A. i 

Roper, C. F 33 

Roper, W. F i 

Russell, C. W 1 

Ryon, E. H i 

Sawyer, O. A. 5 

Sherry, J. W i 

Short, C. I 

Shuttleworth, A. C... 2 

Simms, W I 

Smith, E 3 

Smith, H. W 1 

Smith, 10 

Snow, I. 3 

Stafford. A. E ; i 

Stimpson, E. S. 44 

Stimpson, W. I. 8 

Stone, M. L 3 

Storrs, H. A i 

Sutcliffe, H.H. I 

Syme, D. B i 

Tichon, J. E. i 



Tomlinson, H 2 Welch, W. i 



Trombly, W. C i 

Tubby, W.W I 

Vickerman, J i 

Ward, N I 

Warren, C. H 2 



Whiting, C. D I 

Whitmore, F. A i 

Wolger, J. H i 

Wood, E. S 6 

613 



While several patents are figured twice as belonging to 
more than one inventor, our interests in other patents not 
included will more than balance them. 



"I happened to questioD a weaver as to his earnings and the number 
of looms he was minding-. He answered me he had 23 looms weaving 
drills, and he stood talking to me fully ten minutes, and during that 
time not a single loom came to a staudstill. By the way, he was a 
Blackburn man, and he also told me that he used to think he had a lot 
of work when he had four looms in England, but that he preferred to 
run 23 under his present conditions.'' — \_Blackl)urn Daily Telegraphy 
Oct. 24, 1902. 



"He has just got his sample awnings out, something heavier than 
they have ever made in this mill before. He made them on the North- 
rop looms, and the vice president of the company pronounced them 
superior in quality to the sample given him to make them by."— [From 
Expert's Beport of Nov. 14, 1903. 



312 



SALES. 

Although we print a complete record of sales to the nearest 
possible date, a casual reading of the same will hardly give 
the information which the facts warrant. Sales of improved 
machinery really prove nothing until the machines themselves 
have demonstrated their capacity. The real proof of merit is. 

shown when the original trials produce further 

orders. The greater part of the Northrop looms sold have 
bejen on repeat orders, or from parties who had carefully inves- 
tigated the actual running of the looms in others' mills. 

We first began to ship looms from our plant in 1895. It 
may be interesting to go back and examine the results attained 
from the very first looms that we sent out. 

Taking this first year to 1S96, we find that we then 
sold the Tucapau Mills 320 looms. They have since 
bought 1439 more, total ^759 

We sold the Qiieen City Cotton Company 793 looms, 
and they have since bought 516 more, total 130^ 

Our next order was from the Pacific Mills, 100 
looms. They have since bought 21S3 more, total 3285 

The Merrimack order for 100 looms was entered 
about the same time. They have recently wanted 2048 
more, total 3148 

The Amory Mfg. Co. ordered 100 looms. They 
have since increased, making a total of 688 

The Lawrence Company took 216 looms. The mill 
in which they were running was bought entire by the 
Tremont & Suffolk Company, who afterward bought 
1761 more, total ^977 



213 



The Grosvenor Dale Company placed an early order 
for 335 looms. They kept ordering and ordering at 
various times ; 32S3 more in all, total 3617 

The Social Compan}- had 196 looms to start with. 
Other orders increase to a total of 55^ 

Every one of our first eight customers has therefore not 
only increased their orders, but increased largely. They would 
hardly continue their patronage had the looms not proved 
profitable. 

And we had other customers at this early period, who have 
since continued their patronage. For instance : 

First Order. Total Orders. 

The Pelzer Company 1000 looms. 2702 looms. 

I^ockhart Company 800 '' 1550 " 

Gaffney Mfg. Company 1040 •' 1401 " 

Massachusetts Cotton Mills 100 ^' (both mills) 2415 " 

Ivonsdale Company 12 '• 2095 " 

:Newmarket Mfg. Co 100 " 371 " 

Spartan Mills 1280 '' 1880 " 

DwightMfg. Co 16 " 681 " 

We could, of course, add largely to this list, if we referred 
to more recent examples. We believe those quoted, however, 
are more pertinent, as it was from the results of our earliest 
looms that these proofs of satisfaction were derived. We build 
better looms to-day. Their use would give still better satisfac- 
tion. 

It may be noted that the mills quoted cover several states, 
both North and South. They also cover a wide variety in 
goods. Their reputation is unquestioned. Their example is 
certainl}' worthy of consideration. 

It may be interesting to note the comparison of the sales 
of spindles in the early da}'s with our loom for the same period. 
Taking the first nine years of spindle sales, we note the mills 



214 



that had then pvirchased in lots of 30,000 or more, and in 
parallel column find that the same mills, with few exceptions, 
have also been pioneers with the Northrop loom . 



Spindles Purchased 

in First 

Nine Years. 

Lonsdale Co 103,234 

Merrimack Mfg. Co 97,031 

Lawrence Mfg. Co 69,420 

Boott Cotton Mills 63,905 

Harmony Mills 55,042 

Tremont & Suffolk Mills 51,702 

Social Mfg. Co 48,960 

Coclieco Mfg. Co 48,438 

Amoskeag Mfg. Co 40,465 

Union Cotton Mfg. Co 39,728 

Hamilton Mfg. Co 37,768 

B. B. & E. Knight 37,160 

Grosvenor Dale Co 33,982 

Wampanoag Mills 32,956 

Stark Mills 32,480 

Atlantic Mills, Providence .. 29,528 

Lancaster Mills 26,192 

Pocasset Mfg. Co 25,764 

Chicopee Mfg. Co. 25,472 

Hill Mfg. Co 24,706 

Amory Mfg. Co 23,192 

Appleton Co 22,300 

*Sold to Tremont & Suft'olk Mills. 



Northrop Looms Attachments 

Purchased put on 

in Nine Years. Old Looms. 

2095 

2148 1 

*216 
1132 



1977 
556 
116 

1261 

108 
3617 



304 



10,555 



190 


2 




1 


50 


2288 


126 




142 




688 




310 





The Northrop loom has won recognition outside of the 
United States in spite of the difficulties of foreign introduction. 
A complete new shop was built, equipped and run by the 
Northrop Loom Company of Canada (now Northrop Iron 
Works, Limited), established at Valleyfield, Province of 
Qriebec. The Societe Alsacienne de Constructions Median- 



215 



iques, ol" Mulhouse, Germany, and Belfort, France, are building 
on large orders at both of their establishments. The Ateliers 
de Construction Ruti, of Ruti, Switzerland, are manufacturing 
on various foreign orders for Switzerland, Italy, etc., and the 
firm of Isaac Mautner & Sons of Vienna manufacture for 
Austria and Hungary. 

We have sent looms from our own works to Mexico, 
Holland, Russia, Japan and elsewhere. 



LIST OF NORTHROP LOOMS SOLD 
TO JULY I, 1904. 

NAME. PLACE. QLTANTITY. 

Abbeville Cotton Mills Abbeville, S. C 940 

AcushnetMill Corp New Bedford, Mass 417 

Adams Mfg. Co North Scituate, R. 1 24 

Aiken Mfg. Co Bath, S. C 38 

American Linen Co Fall River, Mass 100 

American Fad cSi Textile Co Cartersville, Ga 572 

American Spinning Co. Greenville, S. C. 758 

AmoryMfg. Co. Manchester, N. H 688 

Amoskeag Mfg. Co. Manchester, N. H 1261 

Anderson Cotton Mills Anderson, S. C. 724 

Androscoggin Mills Lewiston, Me 205 

Appleton Company Lowell, Mass. 310 

Aragon Mills Aragon, Ga 20 

Arcadia Mills Spartanburg, S. C. 344 

Asheville Cotton Mills Asheville, N. C 30 

Ashland Company Ashland, R. 1 20 

Atlantic Cotton Mills Lawrence, Mass 561 



2l6 



NAME. PLACE. QLTANTITY. 

Atlas Linen Company Meredith, N. H. 35 

Attawaugan Mills..- Killingly, Conn. 48 

Augusta P'actoiy Augusta, Ga. 33 

Aurora Cotton Mills Aurora, 111 96 

Barker Cotton Mills Co...... Mobile, Ala 335 

Barker Mills Auburn, Me. 16 

Bates Mfg. Co. Lewiston, Me 3 

Beaumont Mfg. Co. Spartanburg, S. C. 144 

Belton Mills Belton, S. C. 1340 

Bemis Bros. Bag Co. Jackson, Tenn. 812 

Bennett Spinning Co.... New Bedford, Mass i 

Berkeley Company Berkeley, R. 1 356 

Blackstone Mfg. Co.... Blackstone, Mass. :.. 1033 

Boott Cotton Mills Lowell, Mass 1133 

Borden Mfg. Co., Richard Fall River, Mass. 353 

Botany Worsted Mills Passaic, N.J 14 

Bourne Mills Fall River, Mass — 3000 

Bradford Durfee Textile School Fall River, Mass. 3 

Brandon Mills Greenville, S. C. 972 

Bristol Mfg. Corp. New Bedford, Mass. i 

Brogon Cotton Mills Anderson, S. C 366 

Brookside Mills Knoxville, Tenn 650 

Brower & Love Bros. Indianapolis, Ind 2 

Cabarrus Cotton Mills Concord, N. C 543 

Cabot Mfg. Co Brunswick, Me. 304 

Cannon Mfg. Company Concord, N. C 436 

Capital City Mills Columbia, S. C 216 

Centreville Cotton Mills Centreville, R. 1 16 

Chadwick Mfg. Co Charlotte, N. C 300 

Chewalla Cotton Mills Eufaula, Ala 40 



3I7 



NAME. 

Chicopee Mfg. Co 

Chicora Cotton Mills 

China Mfg. Company 

Chiquola Mfg. Company 

Clemson College 

Clifton Mfg. Co 

Cocheco Mfg. Company 

Columbia Mfg. Company 

Columbian Mfg. Company 

Columbus Mfg. Co 

Continental Mills 

Converse Co., D. E 

Cooleemee Cotton Mills 

Cordis Mills 

Coventry Company 

Crompton Company 

Dallas Mfg. Compan}^ 

Darlington Mfg. Co. 

Dunbarton Flax Spinning Co. 

Durham Cotton Mfg. Co. 

Dwight Mfg. Co _.__ 

Eagle & Phenix Mills 

Eagle Mills... 

Easley Cotton Mills 

Edw^ards Mfg. Co 

Erwin Cotton Mills 

Eufaula Cotton Mills 

Everett Mills 

Exeter Mfg. Co 

Exposition Cotton Mills 



PLACE. QirANTITY. 

Chicopee Falls, Mass 126 

Roek Hill, S. C I 

Suncock, N. H 89 

Honea Path, S. C. 1000 

Calhoun Station, S. C. 2 

Clifton, S. C 1000 

Dover, N. H 116 

Ramseur, N. C. 69 

Greenville, N. H 80 

Columbus, Ga 784 

Lewiston, Me. 122 

Glendale, S. C 550 

Cooleemee, N. C. 1296 

Millbury, Mass 61 

Anthony, R. I. 2 

Crompton, R. I. 2 

Huntsville, Ala 544 

Darlington, S. C 592 

Greenwich, N. Y. i 

West Durham, N. C. 300 

Chicopee, Mass 681 

Columbus, Ga. 328 

Woonsocket, R. 1. 2 

Easley, S. C 800 

Augusta, Me. 709 

West Durham, N. C 457 

Eufaula, Ala 33 

Law^rence, Mass. 452 

Exeter, N. H 100 

Atlanta, Ga. 142 



2l8 



NAME. PLACE. QUANTITY. 

Fairfield Cotton Mills Winnsboro, S. C 190 

Falls Company Norwich, Conn. 61 

Farnum & Co., John Lancaster, Penn 12 

Fai-well Mills Lisbon, Me 132 

Florence Mills Forest City, N. C. 200 

Fulton Bag & Cotton Mills Atlanta, Ga 1088 

Gaffney Mfg. Co. : Gaffney, S. C 1401 

Gainesville Cotton Mills Gaine^ille, Ga 1000 

Gary, James S. & Son Baltimore, Md. i 

Georgia School of Technology Atlanta, Ga. 6 

Gibson Mfg. Co Concord, N. C. 6 

Glenn-Lowry Mfg. Co. Whitmire, S. C. 800 

Glen Raven Cotton Mills Burlington, N. C. • 100 

Gosnold Mills Corp New Bedford, Mass. 800 

Granby Cotton Mills Columbia, S. C 1014 

Graniteville Mfg. Co. Vaucluse, S. C 362 

Graniteville Mfg. Co Graniteville, S. C. 592 

Great Falls Mfg. Co Somersworth, N. H 638 

Great Falls Mfg. Co. Rockingham, N. C. 172 

Grendel Mills Greenwood, S. C 498 

Grinnell Mfg. Corp New Bedford, Mass 341 

Grosvenor-Dale Co No. Grosvenor-Dale, Ct. 3617 

Hamilton Mfg. Co. Lowell, Mass. 108 

Hamlet Textile Co. Woonsocket, R. 1 56 

Harmony Grove Mills Harmony Grove, Ga. 180 

Hartsville Cotton Mills Hartsville, S. C 650 

Hathaway Mfg. Co. New Bedford, Mass. 401 

Henderson Cotton Mills Henderson, N. C. 84 

Henrietta Mills Henrietta, N. C. loi 

Hill Mfg. Co Lewiston, Me.... 142 



219 



NAME. PLACE. QUANTITY. 

Hope Co., Phoenix Mill Hope, R. 1 800 

Hoskins Mills - Charlotte, N. C 580 

Indian Head Mills of Alabama Cordova, Ala 200 

Jackson Co.... Nashua, N. H 253 

Johnson & Johnson New Brunswick, N. J 387 



2 
268 
600 



Keasbey & Mattison Ambler, Pa 

Kesler Mfg. Co SaHsbury, N. C 

King Mfg. Co., J. P Augusta, Ga 

King Philip Mills Fall River, Mass 12 

Knowles Loom Works Worcester, Mass 2 

Lancaster Mills Clinton, Mass. 5° 

Lane Mills New Orleans, La 1034 

Lanett Cotton Mills West Point, Ga 672 

Laurens Cotton Mills Laurens, S. C 522 

Lawrence Duck Co Lawrence, Mass. 2 

Limestone Mills Gaffney, S. C. 350 

Lockhart Mills Lockhart, S. C... 1550 

LockwoodCo Waterville, Me 1427 

Lonsdale Co Lonsdale, R.I 2095 

Loray Mills........ Gastonia, N. C. 1580 

Lorraine Mfg. Co Saylesville, R. 1 3 

LouiseMills Charlotte, N. C 152 

Lowell Textile School Lowell, Mass 3 

Lyman Mills. Holyoke, Mass 24 

Lynchburg Cotton Mills Lynchburg, Va i 

Maginnis Cotton Mills New Orleans, La 50 

Manchester Mills Manchester, N. H 5 



220 



NAME. PLACE. QUANTITY. 

Manville Co Manville, R. 1 48 

Massachvisetts Cotton Mills Lowell, Mass 1123 

Massachusetts Mills in Georgia.. Lindale, Ga 1392 

Mass. Institute of Technology .. Boston, Mass. 2 

May's Landing W. Power Co... May's Landing, N. J i 

Meridian Cotton Mills Meridian, Miss 148 

Merrimack Mfg. Co. Lowell, Mass 430 

Merrimack Mfg. Co Huntsville, Ala. 1718 

Methuen Co. Methuen, Mass. 26 

Mills Mfg. Co Greenville, S. C 484 

Millville Mfg. Co Millville, N.J 313 

Mississippi Agr'l College Agr'l College, Miss. 2 

Mississippi Mills Wesson, Miss. 49 

Mohawk Valley Cotton Mills Utica, N. Y . i 

Mollohon Mfg. Co Newberry, S. C 352 

Monaghan Mills Greenville, S. C 1262 

Monarch Cotton Mills Union, S. C 940 

Nantucket Mills Spray, N. C 32 

Nashua Mfg. Co Nashua, N. H. 51 

Naunikeag Steam Cotton Co Salem, Mass 248 

Neuse River Mills Raleigh, N. C. 150 

New Bedford Textile School New Bedford, Mass 2 

NewbeiTy Cotton Mills Newberr}^, S. C 26 

Newmarket Mfg. Co Newmarket, N. H. 371 

New York Mills New York Mills, N. Y..! 52 

Nightingale Mills Putnam, Conn 14 

Ninety-six Cotton Mills Ninety-six, S. C 300 

Nockege Mills Fitchburg, Mass. i 

Nokomis Cotton Mills Lexington, N. C. 320 

N.C. Col. ofAgr'l&Mech. Arts. West Raleigh, N. C 3 



NAME. PLACE. QLIANTITY. 

Odell Mfg. Co Concord, N. C. _ _. 40 

Olympia Cotton Mills Columbia, S. C 2250 

Orangeburg Mfg. Co., Orangeburg, S. C 392 

Orr Cotton Mills Anderson, S. C 1504 

Ossipee Cotton Mills Elon College, N. C 104 

Pacific Mills Lawrence, Mass 2283 

Pacolet Mfg. Co. Pacolet, S. C 222 

Pacolet Mfg. Co Gainesville, Ga 1764 

Palmer Mills Three Rivers, Mass 2 

ParkhiUMfg. Co Fitchburg, Mass 13 

Patterson Mfg. Co. China Grove, N. C 200 

Peabody Mills Newburyport, Mass 16 

Pell City Mfg. Co Pell City, Ala 640 

PelzerMfg. Co. Pelzer, S. C 2702 

Pemberton Co. Lawrence, Mass • 52 

Pepperell Mfg. Co. Biddeford, Me 809 

Philadelphia Textile School Philadelphia, Pa 2 

Piedmont Mfg. Co Piedmont, S. C 640 

Poe Mfg. Co., F. W Greenville, S. C 12 

Portland Silk Co Middletown, Conn i 

Potomska Mills Corporation New Bedford, Mass.... i 

Proximity Mfg. Co Greensboro, N. C 395 

Putnam Mfg. Co Putnam, Conn 252 

Qiieen City Cotton Co Burlington, Vt 1308 

Qiiidnick Mfg. Co Qiiidnick, R. 1 17 

Qiiinebaug Co. Danielson, Conn 206 

Reedy River Mfg. Co Greenville, S. C 153 

Revolution Cotton Mills Greensboro, N. C 389 

Rhode Island School of Design.. Providence, R. I i 



NAME. PLACE. qUANTITY. 

Roanoke Mills Co Roanoke Rapids, N. C... 120 

Rosemary Mfg. Co. Roanoke Rapids, N. C... 258 

Royal Bag & Yarn Mfg. Co. Charleston, S. C. 74 

Royal Cotton Mills Wake Forest, N. C 186 

Salmon Falls Mfg. Co Salmon Falls, N. H.... i 

Salt's Textile Mfg. Co Bridgeport, Conn. 20 

Samoset Co Valley Falls, R.I 80 

Saxon Mills Spartanburg, S. C. 320 

Scottdale Mills Atlanta, Ga 320 

Shetucket Co Norwich, Conn. 70 

Slater Cotton Mills Pawtucket, R. I i 

Slater Mills, H. N Webster, Mass 250 

Social Mfg. Co Woonsocket, R. I ^5'^ 

Spartan Mills Spartanburg, S. C 1880 

Star & Crescent Mills Philadelphia, Pa. 44 

Stark Mills Manchester, N. H 190 

Steele's Mills Rockingham, N. C. 600 

Stevens Mfg. Co. Fall River, Mass.... i 

Stirling Silk Co StirHng, N.J 2 

Strickland Cotton Mills Valdosta, Ga. 20 

Susquehanna Silk Mills Sunbury, Pa. 2 

Tarboro Cotton Factory Tarboro, N. C 200 

Texas Mechanical College College Station, Tex. 2 

Thistle Mill Co Ilchester, Md 4 

Thompson, Jas. & Co. Valley Falls, N. Y. 12 

Thorndike Co. Thorndike, Mass 2 

Toxaway Mill Anderson, S. C. 352 

Tremont & Suffolk Mills Lowell, Mass 1977 

Trion Mfg. Co Trion Factory, Ga. 664 

Tucapau Mills Tucapau, S. C.....; ^759 



223 



NAME. 

United States Cotton Co. 

Utica Cotton Co 

Utica Steam Cotton Mills 

Victor Mfg. Co 

Wachuset Mills 

Walhalla Cotton Mills 

Wan-en Cotton Mills 

Wan-en Mfg. Co 

White & Son, N. D 

Whitman Mills 

Whitney Mfg. Co 

Whittenton Mfg. Co 

Williamson, Jas. N. k W. H. 

Wilmington Cotton Mills 

Woodmff Cotton Mills 

York Mfg. Co 



PLACE. QUANTITY. 

Central Falls, R. 1 1487 

Capron, N. Y. i 

Utica, N. Y 13 

Greers, S. C. 1309 

Worcester, Mass i 

Walhalla, S. C 120 

West Warren, Mass 64 

Warrenville, S. C 1000 

Winch'ndonSpr'gs,Mass. i 

New Bedford, Mass. 829 

Whitney, S. C 394 

Taunton, Mass. i 

Raleigh, N. C. 120 

Wilmington, N. C. 60 

Woodruff, S. C 880 

Saco, Me. 365 

98^737 



224 



LIST OF ATTACHMENTS APnmD TO 

OR ORDERED FOR OTHER MAKES 

OF LOOMS TO JULY I, 1904. 

Warp 
NAME. PLACE. Changfr. Modon. 

Aiken Mfg. Co Bath, S. C 13 13 

Albion Co Valley Falls, R. I i i 

Amoskeag Mfg. Co. Manchester, N. H. iOi5'>5 

Androscoggin Mills Lewiston, Mass. 53 53 

Arlington Mills Lawrence, Mass.... i 13 

Atlantic Cotton Mills Lawrence, Mass. 9 9 

Atlantic Mills _ Providence, R. I . i 

Bates Mfg. Co. Lewiston, Me. 24 

Boston Mfg. Co Waltham, Mass..... 300 

Botany Worsted Mills Passaic, N. J. i 

Cawthon Cotton Mills Co. Selma, Ala. 16 16 

China Mfg. Co Suncook, N. H 14 14 

Dallas Mfg. Co Huntsville, Ala 3 3 

Davol Mills Fall River, Mass 82 82. 

Eagle & Phoenix Mills Columbus, Ga. 102 

Everett Mills Lawrence, Mass. 774 

Exposition Cotton Mills,. Atlanta, Ga i i 

Fulton Bag & Cotton Mills Atlanta, Ga. 502 502 

Gibson Mfg. Co. Concord, N. C. 100 



Warp 
Filling Stop- 
NAME. PLACE. Changer. Motion. 

Globe Mill Woonsocket, R. 1 43 

Gosnold Mills Corp New Bedford, Mass 780 

Grinnell Mfg. Corp. New Bedford, Mass..'... 2 

Hargraves Mills Fall River, Mass 45 21 

Hathaway Mfg. Co New Bedford, Mass 432 

King Philip Mills Fall River, Mass 142 6 

Lancaster Mills CHnton, Mass. 2,288 

LockwoodCo Waterville, Me 803 803 

Lorraine Mfg. Co Pawtucket, R. 1 2 

Manville Co Manville, R. 1 557 

Manville Co., Social Mill.. Woonsocket, R. 1 409 

Mass. Cotton Mills Lowell, Mass 112 113 

Mass. Mills in Georgia Lindale, Ga 6 6 

Mechanics Mills Fall River, Mass i 

Merrimack Mfg. Co Lowell, Mass i i 

Methixen Co Methuen, Mass. i i 

Nashua Mfg. Co Nashua, N. H. 2 

Naumk'gSteamCottonCo. Salem, Mass. i i 

New York Mills NewYork Mills, N.Y. .. i 

Otis Co Ware, Mass 6 



Pacific Mills... Lawrence, Mass i 

Parker Mills Warren, R. I i 

Parkhill Mfg. Co Fitchburg, Mass 29 

Peabody Mfg. Co Newburyport, Mass i i 

Pemberton Co. Lawrence, Mass 60 



226 

Warp 

„ Fillinar Stop- 

NAME. PLACE. Chanifer. Motion. 

Pierce Mfg. Corp. New Bedford, Mass i 

PoeMfg. Co., F.W Greenville, S. C 13 13 

Salt's Textile Mfg. Co Bridgeport, Conn 8 

Shetvicket Co Norwich, Conn i 

Stark Mills , _... Manchester, N. H 2 

Stevens Mfg. Co Fall River, Mass iii 

Stonewall Cotton Mills Stonewall, Miss 12 12 

Susquehanna Silk Mills Sunbur}-, Pa. 7 

Tecuniseh Mills Fall River, Mass i i 

Trainer&SonsMfg.Co.,D. Trainer, Pa ' i 

Treniont & Suffolk Mills.. Lowell, Mass 304 

Utica Steam & Mohawk 

Valley Cotton Mills .. Utica, N. Y i i 



Webster Mfg. Co Suncook, N. H i i 

West Boylston Mfg. Co... Easthampton, Mass. 2 

Whittenton Mfg. Co Taunton, Mass. 4 16 

York Mfg. Co ....._ Saco, Me i 69 



2,069 18,452 



ALSO 



Complete looms, not on list, shipped to foreign coun- 
tries or agents, etc. 1,802 

Extra Filling Changers 121 

Extra Warp Stop-Motions 45 



227 

TOTALS. 

Complete :Northroi) Looms sold to date, 103,653 

Number of Filling Changers applied, 103,739 

:N^uml>er of Warp Stop-motions applied, 1 1 9,036 
Plain Looms made at or ordered from 

Hopedale Works, 3,319 

The looms changed over include looms made by our 
licensees in the United States and furnished to mills also in the 
United States. 

These figures do not include the many thousand looms 
made under license in Canada, England, France, Germany, 
Switzerland, Austria and Hungary. 



This volume is intended to contain all the general informa- 
tion necessary regarding our looms, including all the information 
previously published in other catalogues or circulars that is 
pertinent. We are sometimes asked by overseers or second- 
hands, to send them books containing numbers and description 
of our various loom parts in detail. We have such printed lists 
and are glad to furnish them to the mills which purchase our 
looms, but they are too expensive in character to be generally 
distributed. Any overseer, or other operative, can probably 
have access to this list in the mill office, if necessary. 



238 



While starting to print in April, the unavoidable delays 
have extended the preparation of this volume to the first of July, 
1904, the last tables being made up to that date. While intended 
to be practically complete, we cannot, of course, detail the 
improvements now being developed which have not yet secured 
patent protection. Our customers may be sure, however, that 
the looms which we shall sell them are even further advanced 
than those illustrated herein. 

As soon as this present edition is exhausted, we shall follow 
with a second edition in which the newer devices will be 
exploited. Any further information regarding looms, or any of 
our other products, will be cheerfully furnished on application. 
To those not fully informed as to the general scope of our busi- 
ness, we will say that while the Northrop looms are our chief 
product, we have been introducing cotton machinery improve- 
ments since 1S16, our line of manufacture before taking up the 
Northrop loom being devoted to the introduction of High Speed 
Spindles for spinning frames, Spinning Rings, Spinning Frame 
Separators, Loom Temples, Warpers, Twisters, Spoolers, Reels, 
Banding Machines, Balling Machines, etc., etc. We have other 
literature relating to these products which we will be glad to 
send on application. 

DRAPER COMPANY, 

HoPEDALE, Mass. 
July I, igo4. 



229 



TABLE OF CONTENTS. 

Miscellaneous — Frontispiece, title, etc. i-6 

Former literature on the Northrop Loom 'j-ii 

The Art of Weaving 12-21 

History of the Northrop Loom 32-27 

Qviotations from advertisements 28-40 

The Present Standing of Our Loom 4i"45 

Hoppers, Thread-cutters, Shuttles, Bobbins, etc. 46-63 

Warp Stop-motions 64-69 

Devices for Making Perfect Cloth 69-73 

Double Fork 74-75 

Standard Models of Loom Construction 75'9^ 

Loom construction details 93-112 

Specification 113-121 

Instructions for Running Northrop Looms 122-173 

Cotton Mill Products i74-i75 

Prices and Profits 176-190 

The Labor Qiiestion 191-195 

Attempts at Competition 196-204 

Patent Infringement and Control 205-211 

Sales - 213-227 

Index 229-232 

Memoranda 233-240 



230 



INDEX. 

Advertisements 28-40 

Anti-Bang 90, 96 

Art of Weaving 12-21 

Bobbins 61-63, ^^6, 130-134, 171, 200-202 

Brake 107-10S, 161 -162 

Breakage of Filling 125, 129-130 

Bunches in Cloth 132-133 

Bunches on Feeler Bobbins 72, 134 

Census Reports 174-175, 181 

Changing Over Looms 92 

Checks 130 

Cleaning Looms 45, 166 

Cloth Defects 108, 171-173 

Cloth Inspection 175 

Competition 11, 42, 196-203 

Construction of Looms 93 

Cop Looms 54-55, 129-130, 134-135, 173 

Cop Skewers 54, 59, 62-63, ^35 

Cost of Looms - 168-169, 185 

Cost of Weaving 87-100 

Cotton Mill Products 174-175 

Cut Motion 80, 82, 86, 99-107, 154 

Dimensions of Looms 118-121 

Dobby 79, 81, 97 

Double Fork 74-75' 89-90, 97, 155-156, 171 

Double Pick Cloth 170 

Drawing-in Frame ii3, 164 

Drop Wires 67-6S, 141-144, 173 

Feeler (or Mispick Preventer), 62, 69-73, 85, 149-15 1, 172, 206-207 
Feeler Thread-Cutte;- 72-73, 1 50-151 



331 



Filling Fork iSS'^S^ 

Floats - 45, 66, 171 

Foreign Loom introduction, 195, 197- 199, 202-204, 2 14-2 15, 226-227 

Hand Loom 12-17 

Harness Cams 146-147 

Heddles 64-67, 135-136, 13S-140, 145 

History 11-43 

Hopper 46-49, 52-57, 76-89, 122-124, 171 

Instructions for Running Northrop Looms 122-173 

Knots in Warp 146 

Labor Question 191-195 

Labor on Plain Loom 43"44 

Lay - - 156-157^ 159' 165 

Lay Adjustments 123-124, 150, 157, 159 

Let-off 77, 94-965 151-152, 172 

List of Liventors 2, 208-211 

Literature on Northrop Loom 7'^^i 26-27 

Litigation 1 1 

Long Bobbin Experiments 200-202 

Loom Adjustments - 163 

Loom Equipment 169-170 

Loom Power 165 

Loom Seats m 

Misthread Stop-motions 50-5I5 128 

Misthreading 50, 60, 127-129 

Models of Looms 75-92 

Number of Looms per Weaver, 77, 80, 85, 87, 94, 97, 183, 188-189 

Patents 2, 17-19, 63, 177, 205-211 

Patent Control n, 206-211 

Patent Infringement 205-206 

Percentage of production, 80, 167, 175, 178-180, 183, 187-189,195 
Plain Power Loom, 14-31, 43-44, 68, 90-92, 182, 191-192, 200-202 
Plan of Works.... 6 



232 



Press Notices 7-10 

Prices 176, 1S5, 190 

Print Cloth 15-16, 74, 82, 89, 97, 187 

Product per Operative 14-16, 25, 117, 167, 177 

Profits by use of Northrop Loom 100, 176-190 

Protector 126, 161 

Reed 103, 145, 157-159, 173 

Repairs 166-168, 175 

Replacement of Common Looms 41-42 

Sales of Northrop Looms 41, 181, 212-227 

Seconds 84, 175, 203 

48 
72 

99 
61 

99 
10 
28 
65 
44 
17 



Selvage 147- 

Shedding IN lotion..... 79-83^ 86, 88, 97-98, r46-i47, 163, 

Shuttles 26, 47, 49-51, 58-60, 66, 124-130, 190-192, 196- 

Shuttle Boxes (including binders) 127, 160- 

Shuttle Changers 17-19? 21-25, ^96- 

Shuttle Guard 

Shuttle Position Detector.. 50-51, 56-57, 72-73, 86, 122-123, 

Sizing Warp 164- 

Slack Threads 66, 

Specifications .'. 1 13- 

Speed 14-16, 90, 165, 168, 175, 188, 203-204 

Take-up 77-80,82,98-107, 153-155, 172 

Temple Thread-cutter 50-51, 148-149 

Thin-place Preventer 74, 109 

Transferrer 49, 53, 57, 123 

Warp Beams 152 

Warp Breakage 66-67, ^25, 140, 145, 201 

WarpStop-motion, 25, 42-45, 64-69, 80, 86, 1 12,135-144,200,206-207 
Waste 72, 169 



233 
MEMORANDA. 



234 
MEMORANDA. 



235 
MEMORANDA. 



236 

MEMORANDA. 



237 
MEMORANDA. 



238 

MEMORANDA. 



239 
MEMORANDA. 



240 
MEMORANDA. 



